ID Poll

[Eos of the Eons]

I wish!!!

http://abstractfactory.blogspot.com/2005/10/only-debate-on-intelligent-design-that.html

I love the comments related to the entry. Most IDers don't get the irony at all.

ie: Note the scientist didn't claim the above was an accident in the same way scientists don't claim evolution was an accident. The succession of traits in a successful species at any given time due to whatever conditions and variables during that period are no accident. Study up on science, don't just read what non-scientists claim is science.


I note the guy who asks why "evolution must happen at a constant rate". Who told him that?

We need better education in schools, so that people don't grow up left with such notions.

 

[HeyLeroy]

The results are in

 

[Ladewig]

It's silly NOT to. Here is why:

1. We can't say for certain there is no God,

and we can't say for certain that there is no Flying Spagetti Monster, but that does not mean that it is appropriate to teach that FSM is the source of all life on this planet.

But perhaps I misunderstand your position. How exactly would you work ID into a school curriculum? Please specify what grades would be exposed to it, how much class time would be devoted to it, and in what class it would be taught. Or simply provide a ratio of time spent teaching evolution to time spent teaching ID.

Where did science come from?

Primarily from the Greeks (or as President Bush once said in 1999: "the Grecians"), but many philosphers and naturalists during the Age of Enlightment helped it along.

 

[HeyLeroy]

Primarily from the Greeks (or as President Bush once said in 1999: "the Grecians"), but many philosphers and naturalists during the Age of Enlightment helped it along.

Probably because they came up with 'the formula'.

 

[Bronze Dog]

1. We can't say for certain there is no God...

We can't say for certain this is no FSM, as Ladewing said. We can't say for certain there are no invisible pink unicorns, dragons, goblins, trolls, yeti, bigfeet, or pink elephants inside breadrolls.

If IDers want their stuff to be taught in science class, they have to do the science. They're the people with the burden of proof.

 

[BillHoyt]

Originally Posted by Iamme :
It's sily NOT to. Here is why:

1. We can't say for certain there is no God, to which any broad definition couldn't apply.

2. We cannot rule out that ID and evolution aren't intertwined. One does NOT have to be independent of the other, the way true evolutionists make it out to be.

fishbob:
1. Irrelevant

Iamme:
1aa. I wil let this one go as hashing over such an original vague statement I made might just get confusing for the listeners.

fishbob:
2. Yes we can. Evolution is science, ID is wackazoolian nonsense. Evolution explains stuff that we can see and measure, ID explains nothing.

Silly indeed.

Iamme:
2aa. Ha. Where did science come from? Who told gravity it could exist? Who told magnetism to occur? Who told heat to go up? Who told hydrogen to compress and create a vast array of other elements? Who told lime to harden into cement? Who told iron to work with coke and make steel? Who told about two creatures forming one child? Who told a planet to whirl? Who told the moon to be in the exact spot so that a perfect solar eclipse would reveal just the corona and whose tide actions created cleansing and other things? for the oceans? Who told the water to form a rain cycle? Who told a tomato seed to also make an edible flesh while it was at it? Who told a peacock to get it's feathers? What made a bird toi even decide to have wings? (Obviously birds were not created within the medium of air. Something caused the creature to decide that it should develop something to enable it to get into the air.) Who told songbirds to sing? Who.............................................................................................................................................................?????????

You tell me EXACTLY where YOU came from, and then we will talk and discuss whether or not this is silly.
__________________

*yawn* Somebody wake me up when he makes a logical argument.

 

[Bronze Dog]

2. We cannot rule out that ID and evolution aren't intertwined. One does NOT have to be independent of the other, the way true evolutionists make it out to be.

Never heard any evolutionist say anything like that, as far as can I recall. That doesn't make ID any more scientific, though. It's still nothing but argument from ignorance and lack of imagination. Just like the alien and earth god hypotheses of crop circles.

 

[BillHoyt]

Never heard any evolutionist say anything like that, as far as can I recall. That doesn't make ID any more scientific, though. It's still nothing but argument from ignorance and lack of imagination. Just like the alien and earth god hypotheses of crop circles.

Also a breach of Occam's razor, and...

But, it is similar to some ID claims that the "concept" works with evolution. Yep. I'll bet melted stilton works with evolution, if you serve it with crunchy toast points.