TheGreatEmperor TheGreatEmperor

Expelled: Is Intelligent Design a Science?

Expelled: Is Intelligent Design a Science?

A discussion of seriousness.

There has been a lot of movement lately to once again start teaching Intelligent Design in schools. Many mainstream educators think that science should be redifined as to what is logical, rather then what is actually true.

The media has played along to this in different forms. One of the forms was the new movie Expelled which show cases quite a few powerful points as to why Intelligent Dsign deserves to be taught in schools. Not only does it bring to light problems with the Theory of Evolution, including such evidence as its contribution to Nazism and Global Warming. This movie also shows that the theoy of Intelligent Desing is completly scientific and that it is only being excluded because it has religious support.

Now several school distrcits, states, and even universities have considered the inclusion of Intelligent Design in the classroom enviornment. This has spiked the concern of many that instead of being taught alongside evolution, it will be taught istead of it.

Religious background aside I wish to know the standpoint of the community. Keep it clean and relatively serious.

801,299 views 467 replies
Reply #276 Top

Evolution for Dummies:Chapter 1A little Ameoba was swimming around one day, and wished he could go on land. But he had no legs.Poof... a million years later, legs popped out of his single cell. Now the ameoba crawled onto land. But he couldn't see anything, so it did him no good. I wish I could see, thought the little ameoba.Poof... a million years later, an eye appeared. ...etc etc
End of quote


Wow you REALLY don't understand the concept of evolution do you? Considering the vigour which you have put into arguing against it you really do yourself no favours by displaying your complete lack of understanding of the subject you're arguing against.

I'd also suggest taking heed of what maheshjr2004 kindly took the time to suggest to you in his post.
Reply #277 Top
It's a collective delusionalism that reduces all discussion to be just as simplistic as religion, especially the death-god-literalist Christianity "Forgiven" (what an ironic name) subscribes to. If you attack their beliefs, they play the persecution card, because as I pointed out white male Christians are so persecuted in this day and age, owning almost all the means of production, media, and government.
End of quote


I beg your pardon, sir. I certainly hope "Forgiven" is the exception rather than the rule, in this case. The delusionalism is more a character of a particular person than of a religion to which they may subscribe (or, if that sounds like an extremely arrogant statement, then: some people just don't get it. Forgiven appears to be one of them.)
Reply #278 Top
In my opinion, anyone who believes in some sort of supreme being (i.e. some sort of god) is delusional.
Reply #279 Top
Forgiven, please, pretty please, try to read up on evolution. And not another anti-evolutionist pamphlet. The reason people get irritated is that you clearly have no grasp on the things you criticise. And you fail to listen any time someone points that out.


Reply #280 Top
how did life begin?well because a bunch of protoaminoacids bunked together to form the firsts stransd of DNA... there that's how it started. The question how:In the natural sciences, abiogenesis, the question of the origin of life, is the study of how life on Earth might have emerged from non-life. Scientific consensus is that abiogenesis occurred sometime between 4.4 billion years ago, when water vapor first liquefied,[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] This topic also includes panspermia and other exogenic theories regarding possible extra-planetary or extraterrestrial origins of life, thought to have possibly occurred sometime over the last 13.7 billion years in the evolution of the Universe since the Big Bang.[7]
End of quote


Once again... where did the protoaminoacids come from?
See, all your answer include something evolving from something that is already there!
You evolutionists just can't seem to get past this, or go back any further. You are just too afraid to admit that you do not know, and will not admit that some intelligent designer must have to be involved. It's as if you will explode into a ball of fire or something if you admit to a God. Wow... it is amazing. I am so glad that my mind is not so closed as to not being able to see the logic of God, and to give Him credit.

And once again, there is that word "consensus". Science is NOT based on "consensus". More Al Gore thinking there.


I don't think science proves that there is no God. I think it proves just the opposite. But some folks are just too blind to see it.


Reply #281 Top
Evolution for Dummies:Chapter 1A little Ameoba was swimming around one day, and wished he could go on land. But he had no legs.Poof... a million years later, legs popped out of his single cell. Now the ameoba crawled onto land. But he couldn't see anything, so it did him no good. I wish I could see, thought the little ameoba.Poof... a million years later, an eye appeared. ...etc etcWow you REALLY don't understand the concept of evolution do you? Considering the vigour which you have put into arguing against it you really do yourself no favours by displaying your complete lack of understanding of the subject you're arguing against. I'd also suggest taking heed of what maheshjr2004 kindly took the time to suggest to you in his post.
End of quote


It's called "humor" and sarcasm. Sorry that you missed that.

It's explaining the rediculous by being rediculous. I thought my little story sums it up quite nicely. And it is pretty much based on how evolutionist think.

Reply #282 Top
You are just too afraid to admit that you do not know, and will not admit that some intelligent designer must have to be involved.
End of quote


Argh. Why is it that the cause of any lack of complete understanding of a natural process results in people saying God must have done it?

Please, throughout history people have said that about so many things, and then the causes have been proved to be entirely natural. Why is it so difficult for people to learn from our past?

If everyone had your attitude, sir, we should all still be living in caves as no-one would have questioned the cause of anything at all. I for one am glad that there are people who are not satisfied with 'God must have done it' as an answer to anything. I mean are you REALLY saying that? I just find it hard to believe. Come on, seriously?

Another point worth making here is that science has never disproven or doubted the existence of God, it is not mutually exclusive. What it has done is shown that certain peoples interpretations of certain books is wrong, at which point said people seem to find it easy enough to find a different interpretation to preserve their beliefs.

Reply #283 Top
Evolution for Dummies:Chapter 1A little Ameoba was swimming around one day, and wished he could go on land. But he had no legs.Poof... a million years later, legs popped out of his single cell. Now the ameoba crawled onto land. But he couldn't see anything, so it did him no good. I wish I could see, thought the little ameoba.Poof... a million years later, an eye appeared. ...etc etcWow you REALLY don't understand the concept of evolution do you? Considering the vigour which you have put into arguing against it you really do yourself no favours by displaying your complete lack of understanding of the subject you're arguing against. I'd also suggest taking heed of what maheshjr2004 kindly took the time to suggest to you in his post.It's called "humor" and sarcasm. Sorry that you missed that.It's explaining the rediculous by being rediculous. I thought my little story sums it up quite nicely. And it is pretty much based on how evolutionist think.
End of quote


Right. Humourous and sarctastic. Also based on how evolutionists think. So how do you operate exactly? Say what you think and when questioned resort to suggesting you were joking and being sarcastic?

And as for being ridiculous, I'm afraid some things you just have to accept as being unusual to us in our extremely limited experience. Calling it ridiculous isn't going to change the fact.

Reply #284 Top
I believe every single word in the Bible.which version of the bible do u believe? cuz i read the st james bible, if i remember right, it said if i work on sunday, i have to be kill. so does that goes for everyone who worked on sins.(i can bet with all the money i have, sometime they worked on sundays).
End of quote


Sheesh. Nice try. It's called the "King James" version, by the way. Completely out of context, of course. But that is the normal way skeptics "try " to use the scripture against others. Read the whole thing. You might learn something.
Reply #285 Top
The theory of evolution is just the most logical conclusion available based observation and evaluation of the existing evidence that is available. There is a wealth of evidence to support it as the most logical and most plausible explanation for how things came to be.The only "evidence" that supports any sort of "intelligent design" or creationist theory is people's illogical belief in an imaginary, supposedly omniscient and omnipotent entity, as well as texts written thousands of years ago that have been repeatedly translated, retranslated, and mis-translated for centuries.
End of quote


So YOU can't answer the simple question either.
It may seem logical to you. But not to me. ID seems very logical to some. I don't see any evidence supporting "something from nothing" you guys hang everything on.

All these posts avoid answering the question. It has become rather amusing, yet sad.
Just admit... someone.. anyone.... that you do not know.
Reply #286 Top
If a so called God created the Earth.. do you think he took out the extended warranty? And if so.. when do you think he'll take it back to the shop for being faulty?

He apparantly already tried a system format and reinstall.. but he left a virus in the boot drive (flood... ark.. ).

It's early.. wanted to write alot of stuff about why people should not believe in God and why Intelligent design is flawed and stupid. But suddenly I realised that we live in times where all opinions and ideas are (should be) freely heard and why should I be one of the bigots to knock someone else's beliefs just because I don't agree with them?

Reply #287 Top
Forgiven, please, pretty please, try to read up on evolution. And not another anti-evolutionist pamphlet. The reason people get irritated is that you clearly have no grasp on the things you criticise. And you fail to listen any time someone points that out.
End of quote


Please. Study the Scriptures. You have no grasp on the concept of God.
Reply #288 Top
I believe every single word in the Bible.which version of the bible do u believe? cuz i read the st james bible, if i remember right, it said if i work on sunday, i have to be kill. so does that goes for everyone who worked on sins.(i can bet with all the money i have, sometime they worked on sundays).Sheesh. Nice try. It's called the "King James" version, by the way. Completely out of context, of course. But that is the normal way skeptics "try " to use the scripture against others. Read the whole thing. You might learn something.
End of quote


Considering the arbitry nature of the number of days in a week, it is a bit strange. We have seven days because at the time we were only aware of seven planets in the solar system, if we had found any more for example Uranus which I think is just visible to the naked eye we'd have had eight day weeks.

I'm not an expert on the mythology in those times but it's interesting how our general impression of God - or Gods in those days - has changed. That and the political manipulation of holy books (think emperor Constantine and the bible) leaves me completely unable to sympathise with religious zealots and their beliefs.
Reply #289 Top
Forgiven,

I think that part of the problem is that your conflating two different scientific fields. One is evolution, the other is abiogenesis. Abiogenesis is the study of how life arose, evolution is the study of how life develops. They are related, but neither one requires the other to operate. Evolution says nothing about how life originated, nor does it need to. For modern evolutionary theory to work, all that is required is for life to exist.

Now you can rant and rail at abiogenesis all you want, and I'll be the first to say that we currently don't know how life began. But that doesn't invalidate a separate field of research. Life obviously began somehow since we're here, but studying how life changes doesn't require that we explain how it began.

On another topic, you seem to have a problem with the word consensus. You say that science is not based on consensus, and while that's true, general agreement between scientists does arise. What science is based on is reality, the observable universe. When hundreds of different scientists are competing with one another for grant money, fame, recognition, etc. there is a great deal of motivation to prove your colleagues wrong. Yet, at the same time, scientists must base their findings on reality. So, with those two factors working together, a consensus can develop in the presence of overwhelming evidence. The consensus has some authority because it is based on reality, and we can say that it is reasonably accurate because there are competing scientists who could become famous for showing that it is wrong.

Also, you seem to be latching onto the word simply because you disagree with the conclusion. Do you doubt other scientific findings just because someone may use the word consensus? There's probably a consensus among doctors that the Germ Theory of Disease is the proper way to diagnosis patients. There's consensus among chemists that Valency Theory is the foundation for all chemical interactions. My point is that if you don't doubt these scientific fields with the same passion, then your argument isn't about the word consensus, but simply your disagreement with the conclusion of the research.

Finally, you say that atheism is a religion. It's not. For me, being an atheist is simply disbelief in a god. Disbelief in one thing is not belief in something else. To say that is a religion is like saying not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Reply #290 Top
Heathens will be purged.

I couldn't resist ;)

Seriously though, it is true. I stand with Forgiven in his statements. I believe the Bible is the testimony of the creator to his creation (as it claims to be). I base this belief on the evidence of things unseen (faith), as well as the evidence presented in the Bible. The God of the Bible claims that his calling card, his proof of authenticity, is the ability to foretell events. The two primary events foretold are the coming of Jesus Christ to Earth, one past and one still future. A secondary, and more contemporary event, involves the nation of Israel in the times immediately proceeding the second coming. The primary focus of the Bible, and of creation itself, is Jesus Christ. Everything is made by him and for him.

Mankind is too proud and too foolish to properly consider himself in the light of a being so vastly superior, good and pure. So he rebells against the God that is so self evident. We are created, there is a creator. In his folly, man imagines himself the god of his own life and fate. This rebellion is the transgression punishable by death, the specific sin, lying for instance, is simply a symptom of the rebellion.

As foretold, the nation of Israel was destroyed and its people scattered among the nations. No other people in written or verbal history have been scattered thus without being assimilated into the various host cultures. In spite of horrific persecution everywhere as motive to assimilate, as foretold they remained a discreet and peculiar people over centuries.

As foretold, the nations of the world divided up the land that God declared he had decreed to Israel, most of the national borders in the ME were simply created by international fiat.

As foretold, the nation of Israel was restored and returned to Jerusalem. No other nation has returned from the ashes of history in like manner. As foretold, she would be surrounded by enemies.

As foretold, the focus of the nations is upon Jerusalem. Since its inception, roughly two thirds of the United Nations business has been directed against or critical of Israel. The economics of oil guarantee the focus to intensify, and inevitably, every nation in the world will align itself with the Arabs against Israel.

As foretold, the final solution decided upon by man will be the destruction of Israel, Jerusalem, and the Jewish people. When all hope for Israel is gone, the Jesus Christ will appear on the Earth for the second time, this time as a lion rather than a lamb.

As foretold, he will establish his kingdom in Jerusalem for 1000 years, and the knowledge of God will cover the earth like water. This earthly kingdom is simply an example to humanity of how life would have been had his laws been obeyed.

Of course all this could be coincidence, and we could simply be losing the OMG Lottery on a daily basis in spades.

Anyone who peeps into a microscope or looks at a rock, and presumes to tell me what happened 50 million years ago gets very little of my serious attention. ANY narrative of the past that precedes written history is inherently unprovable, and has to be accepted on a basis of faith if at all. On this basis alone, evolution deserves no intellectual attention, beyond its use as a tool by atheists.

So, I will choose to believe the testimony of the one who has demonstrated the ability to foretell the future, rather that those who have to constantly rewrite their contemporary history...

And for Forgiven, and any interested, the reason for the 6 (plus one) days of creation ? It is a picture of the history of man. Days are prophetically related to thousands of years. It has been approximately 6000 years since creation, which will be followed by the 1000 years ruled by the Price of Peace. (the day of rest).

The creator is still creating. As foretold, there will be a perfect world, with no death or SIN. This fallen world we now live in is to select the inhabitants of the future perfect world.

Heathens will be purged. Be wise and repent.

For thus says Jehovah who Created the heavens, God who has formed the earth and made it; who has established it, who has not created it void, but has formed it to be inhabited: I am Jehovah, and there is no other. I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth. I did not say to the seed of Jacob (Israel), Seek me in vain. I, Jehovah, speak righteousness, I declare things that are right. Assemble yourselves and come; draw near together, you who have escaped from the nations. Those who set up the wood of their graven image, and those that pray to a god that cannot save, they know nothing. Declare and approach; yea, let them take counsel together. Who has declared this from antiquity? Who has told it since then? Is it not I, Jehovah. And there is no other God besides Me; a just Mighty God and a Savior; there is no one besides Me. Turn to Me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am the Mighty God, and there is no other. I have sworn by Myself, the word has gone out of My mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, that to Me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.
(Isaiah 45:18-23)

Reply #291 Top
Tekel59,

If evidence through prophecy for the coming of Jesus and his divinity is so compelling, then why are there still Jews? They are their prophecies after all. Shouldn't they be the best and most authoritative people to judge whether or not Jesus fulfilled all those prophecies?
Reply #292 Top
Tekel59,If evidence through prophecy for the coming of Jesus and his divinity is so compelling, then why are there still Jews? They are their prophecies after all. Shouldn't they be the best and most authoritative people to judge whether or not Jesus fulfilled all those prophecies?
End of quote


And if we evolved from monkeys, then why are there still monkeys around.
Reply #293 Top
Easy, and explained biblically. Because they are under temporary judgment and are divinely blinded. Because their unbelief was required for Jesus to be crucified. Because their forgiveness after their rebellion glorifies the mercy of God.

The fullness of the Gentiles refers to God dealing with mankind through his church. ie the church age, the current and temporary situation...

For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, that you not be wise within yourselves, that hardness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: The Deliverer will come out of Zion, and He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; for this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins. Indeed, concerning the gospel they are enemies because of you, but concerning the election they are beloved because of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are without regret. For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. For God has enclosed everyone in disobedience, that He might have mercy on each one. Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out! For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has become His counselor? Or who has first given to Him and it shall be repaid to him? For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen.
(Romans 11:25-36)

It is not because we gentiles are smarter.
Reply #294 Top
Heathens will be purged.I couldn't resist Seriously though, it is true. I stand with Forgiven in his statements. I believe the Bible is the testimony of the creator to his creation (as it claims to be). I base this belief on the evidence of things unseen (faith), as well as the evidence presented in the Bible. The God of the Bible claims that his calling card, his proof of authenticity, is the ability to foretell events. The two primary events foretold are the coming of Jesus Christ to Earth, one past and one still future. A secondary, and more contemporary event, involves the nation of Israel in the times immediately proceeding the second coming. The primary focus of the Bible, and of creation itself, is Jesus Christ. Everything is made by him and for him.Mankind is too proud and too foolish to properly consider himself in the light of a being so vastly superior, good and pure. So he rebells against the God that is so self evident. We are created, there is a creator. In his folly, man imagines himself the god of his own life and fate. This rebellion is the transgression punishable by death, the specific sin, lying for instance, is simply a symptom of the rebellion.As foretold, the nation of Israel was destroyed and its people scattered among the nations. No other people in written or verbal history have been scattered thus without being assimilated into the various host cultures. In spite of horrific persecution everywhere as motive to assimilate, as foretold they remained a discreet and peculiar people over centuries.As foretold, the nations of the world divided up the land that God declared he had decreed to Israel, most of the national borders in the ME were simply created by international fiat.As foretold, the nation of Israel was restored and returned to Jerusalem. No other nation has returned from the ashes of history in like manner. As foretold, she would be surrounded by enemies.As foretold, the focus of the nations is upon Jerusalem. Since its inception, roughly two thirds of the United Nations business has been directed against or critical of Israel. The economics of oil guarantee the focus to intensify, and inevitably, every nation in the world will align itself with the Arabs against Israel.As foretold, the final solution decided upon by man will be the destruction of Israel, Jerusalem, and the Jewish people. When all hope for Israel is gone, the Jesus Christ will appear on the Earth for the second time, this time as a lion rather than a lamb.As foretold, he will establish his kingdom in Jerusalem for 1000 years, and the knowledge of God will cover the earth like water. This earthly kingdom is simply an example to humanity of how life would have been had his laws been obeyed.Of course all this could be coincidence, and we could simply be losing the OMG Lottery on a daily basis in spades.Anyone who peeps into a microscope or looks at a rock, and presumes to tell me what happened 50 million years ago gets very little of my serious attention. ANY narrative of the past that precedes written history is inherently unprovable, and has to be accepted on a basis of faith if at all. On this basis alone, evolution deserves no intellectual attention, beyond its use as a tool by atheists.So, I will choose to believe the testimony of the one who has demonstrated the ability to foretell the future, rather that those who have to constantly rewrite their contemporary history...And for Forgiven, and any interested, the reason for the 6 (plus one) days of creation ? It is a picture of the history of man. Days are prophetically related to thousands of years. It has been approximately 6000 years since creation, which will be followed by the 1000 years ruled by the Price of Peace. (the day of rest).The creator is still creating. As foretold, there will be a perfect world, with no death or SIN. This fallen world we now live in is to select the inhabitants of the future perfect world.Heathens will be purged. Be wise and repent.For thus says Jehovah who Created the heavens, God who has formed the earth and made it; who has established it, who has not created it void, but has formed it to be inhabited: I am Jehovah, and there is no other. I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth. I did not say to the seed of Jacob (Israel), Seek me in vain. I, Jehovah, speak righteousness, I declare things that are right. Assemble yourselves and come; draw near together, you who have escaped from the nations. Those who set up the wood of their graven image, and those that pray to a god that cannot save, they know nothing. Declare and approach; yea, let them take counsel together. Who has declared this from antiquity? Who has told it since then? Is it not I, Jehovah. And there is no other God besides Me; a just Mighty God and a Savior; there is no one besides Me. Turn to Me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am the Mighty God, and there is no other. I have sworn by Myself, the word has gone out of My mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, that to Me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear. (Isaiah 45:18-23)
End of quote


Thank you! God bless you in your excellent post. I couldn't have said it better (which obviously I didn't!)
I guess believing in God is so simple, and His existance is so clear, that it seems so odd to me that so many fail to see Him... or His creation.
They have no concept of Faith. If it can't be explained with science, then it doesn't exist in their minds. Science proves that there is a God. Science was created by God.
Reply #295 Top
And if we evolved from monkeys, then why are there still monkeys around.
End of quote


How does it feel to be so mind-numbingly ignorant of the world around you? Do you enjoy spouting off religious propaganda while misunderstanding basic science? Are you proud to be an idiot?

Heathens will be purged. Be wise and repent.
End of quote


How Christian. Why not read the NT sometime? I heard you might be missing most of the good stuff.
Reply #296 Top
Forgiven,I think that part of the problem is that your conflating two different scientific fields. One is evolution, the other is abiogenesis. Abiogenesis is the study of how life arose, evolution is the study of how life develops. They are related, but neither one requires the other to operate. Evolution says nothing about how life originated, nor does it need to. For modern evolutionary theory to work, all that is required is for life to exist.Now you can rant and rail at abiogenesis all you want, and I'll be the first to say that we currently don't know how life began. But that doesn't invalidate a separate field of research. Life obviously began somehow since we're here, but studying how life changes doesn't require that we explain how it began.On another topic, you seem to have a problem with the word consensus. You say that science is not based on consensus, and while that's true, general agreement between scientists does arise. What science is based on is reality, the observable universe. When hundreds of different scientists are competing with one another for grant money, fame, recognition, etc. there is a great deal of motivation to prove your colleagues wrong. Yet, at the same time, scientists must base their findings on reality. So, with those two factors working together, a consensus can develop in the presence of overwhelming evidence. The consensus has some authority because it is based on reality, and we can say that it is reasonably accurate because there are competing scientists who could become famous for showing that it is wrong.Also, you seem to be latching onto the word simply because you disagree with the conclusion. Do you doubt other scientific findings just because someone may use the word consensus? There's probably a consensus among doctors that the Germ Theory of Disease is the proper way to diagnosis patients. There's consensus among chemists that Valency Theory is the foundation for all chemical interactions. My point is that if you don't doubt these scientific fields with the same passion, then your argument isn't about the word consensus, but simply your disagreement with the conclusion of the research.Finally, you say that atheism is a religion. It's not. For me, being an atheist is simply disbelief in a god. Disbelief in one thing is not belief in something else. To say that is a religion is like saying not collecting stamps is a hobby.
End of quote


I lump all these together, for simplicity sake. To me, they are all related and seem to be joined together at the hip.
Al Gore says that there is a consensus on Global Warming, and the debate is over. Says who? Just like the movie that this thread is based on... those very qualified scientist that think otherwise.. both in the topic of Global warming AND Creationism vs evolution... are ignored by the press. They are fired and black-listed. Go against the "consensus"... even with proof, and you are silenced.
So where is free speech? It is only allowed if you agree with "them".


Reply #297 Top
Mag1KaL,
Gotta agree with you on that, bunk, pure bunk.
Reply #298 Top
Forgiven,

As for the monkeys comment, this is a common creationist misconception about evolution. Humans did not evolve from monkeys, apes, or any other primate. We all share a common ancestor. Saying this is a bit like saying "If you evolved from your cousin, then why does your cousin still exist?" The statement really makes no sense. You didn't evolve from your cousin, you both share a common ancestor. The same goes for humans and apes. We didn't evolve from them, they share a common ancestor with us.

Also, while you may lump different scientific fields together, I don't think it is reasonable to expect others to do so as well. Why not lump quantum mechanics and relativity together? Or aeronautics and meteorology? Why stop there? One could say that abiogenesis has more in common with chemistry than with evolution. So why not group them?

Tekel59,

You say that the Jews don't believe Jesus was the messiah because divinely blinded. This strikes me as odd. One of the arguments I hear from theists for the existence of evil and immoral actions and events in the world is that God gave us free will to choose between right and wrong. But then believes come up with examples where God takes away someone's free will. You've just given an example of him taking away the free will of millions of people over two thousand years.

Here's another example: When Moses tried to free the Hebrews, God hardened Pharaoh's heart, taking away his free will, and forcing innocent Egyptians to suffer through ten unnecessary plagues. Why does God need to take away the free will he gave us just to prove a point. Why are these people made to suffer when they had no choice in the matter?
Reply #299 Top
Go against the "consensus"... even with proof, and you are silenced. So where is free speech? It is only allowed if you agree with "them".
End of quote


Unfortunately it seems to be human nature. Look at the persecution Galileo faced by the catholics. Fortunately him and others like him persevered and focused on factual evidence over consensus and even their own beliefs. They did what you do not do, and did not settle for the 'God must be responsible' argument.

Ironically, for many years the 'consensus' was that of religious dogma, of which I suppose you have no problem with.
Reply #300 Top
How many people on here have watched the movie being debated?

Speaking specifically about it: I enjoy how well it has spurred heated debate, but I don't think it did a good job.

When the movie started, it claimed it was fighting for a kind of "freedom of speech". It suggests that good scientists, who feel they have real evidence for something, are being silenced, rather than being allowed to even discuss their evidence.

If the movie was right, then this evidence should be discussed openly. But instead, there's hard-core "anti-anything-but-evolutionists" who decide that this data is unimportant before even looking at it.

But I feel the movie seemed very hypocritical. It tries too hard to 'help' viewers feel the way it wants them to. (For example, lots of comparing atheist-evolutionists to Nazis.) That tactic defeats it's purpose. The problem is that a large scientific community is ignoring ID evidence because of outright prejudice, but this movie is too quick to help build prejudice on the opposing side.

Are you following me?


Religious questions are brought up with the discussion of Intelligent Design, but they're getting carried away. ID in itself is a scientific theory into how living things became how they are, just like evolution. It doesn't even have to contradict evolution, because living organisms may have been designed to evolve. And it certainly doesn't declare a 'god' as the designer, it simply suggests life on earth may have been designed, and did not randomly start. (Yes, some people think it might have been a god. Others believe aliens. Maybe it was a time-traveling super computer we'll build in 1000 years? Oh, paradoxes!)