|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 3:31 pm
I figured that we needed a new topic on this, because the others are all ten-plus pages long.
Discuss:
Intelligent Design/Evolution - Pros and Cons
Why Intelligent Design isn't included in rational discussion
Other such things (no spamming)
This is Guardian's new account.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 6:18 pm
And in all those other threads that are ten plus pages long, you don't think everyone has covered everything? As long as the discussion stays on the two points (disregard the "other such things" because those are covered in the other threads), then I'll let this stay. Once it starts to repeat everything the other threads have said, I'll have to lock it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-functioning Businesswoman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 11:28 pm
We already have, like, 3 threads devoted to this stuff...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 10:07 am
I just think it would be logical to start new threads about evolution every once in a while, so that people who want to joint in don't have to read ten pages of discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 11:45 pm
Intelligent Design is horrible. It is disregarded in more serious discussions because it lacks any validity. Intelligent Design effectively says, "Science is wrong so God must be real." It is not a religious argument, as it is not based upon any religious principle. It is simply an attack on the scientific institution, and it is one unsupported by evidence, relying upon logical fallacies instead.
Supporters of Intelligent Design are roughly equivalent to Luddites, relying upon bigotry and rhetoric to support selfish desires. It is unfortunate so many people have been fooled by this set of "beliefs."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:54 pm
zz1000zz Intelligent Design is horrible. It is disregarded in more serious discussions because it lacks any validity. Intelligent Design effectively says, "Science is wrong so God must be real." It is not a religious argument, as it is not based upon any religious principle. It is simply an attack on the scientific institution, and it is one unsupported by evidence, relying upon logical fallacies instead. Supporters of Intelligent Design are roughly equivalent to Luddites, relying upon bigotry and rhetoric to support selfish desires. It is unfortunate so many people have been fooled by this set of "beliefs." Excuse me, but you are being very rude. It is one thing to say that you do not believe in Intelligent Design, but it is quite another to condemn all those who do believe as lunatics. You are speaking in all abstracts and it sounds as if you do not even know the "logical fallacies" and "bigotry and rhetoric" that you mention. I believe in Intelligent Design and I have debated with many people about evolution, including Lethkar. But, I have never once called evolution "horrible." If you have something serious that you would like to say about the topic, be my guest, but please be more respectful. If evolution is as logical as you claim, then you would not need to slander Intelligent Design to prove your point. Frankly, there is "logical" support for both sides, and it all comes down to which facts you decide to "believe" are more logical for yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 9:09 pm
Goldenlici zz1000zz Intelligent Design is horrible. It is disregarded in more serious discussions because it lacks any validity. Intelligent Design effectively says, "Science is wrong so God must be real." It is not a religious argument, as it is not based upon any religious principle. It is simply an attack on the scientific institution, and it is one unsupported by evidence, relying upon logical fallacies instead. Supporters of Intelligent Design are roughly equivalent to Luddites, relying upon bigotry and rhetoric to support selfish desires. It is unfortunate so many people have been fooled by this set of "beliefs." Excuse me, but you are being very rude. It is one thing to say that you do not believe in Intelligent Design, but it is quite another to condemn all those who do believe as lunatics. You are speaking in all abstracts and it sounds as if you do not even know the "logical fallacies" and "bigotry and rhetoric" that you mention. How is it rude? Is saying a liar is a liar rude? I have never claimed people who "believe" in Intelligent Design are lunatics. I would imagine most are simply misled, while a few are dishonest. Goldenlici I believe in Intelligent Design and I have debated with many people about evolution, including Lethkar. But, I have never once called evolution "horrible." If you have something serious that you would like to say about the topic, be my guest, but please be more respectful. If evolution is as logical as you claim, then you would not need to slander Intelligent Design to prove your point. Frankly, there is "logical" support for both sides, and it all comes down to which facts you decide to "believe" are more logical for yourself. Intelligent Design is a baseless attack on science. There is no "logical support" for it. You accuse me of "slander," but I am simply stating facts. Those facts happen to be quite damning for Intelligent Design, but this does not make them "slander." In fact, the ultimate defense against slander charges is accuracy. If you truly believe the things I say are "slander," then you should show how things I have said are not completely accurate. Ultimately, there is not a single legitimate reason to "believe" in Intelligent Design.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 11:22 pm
Except for, you know, this one book. Best seller I hear. Begins with a b I think? The Bible! Yeah. You know, except for that. -shrug- Personally, I've reconciled the two points of view. They kinda go together quite nicely, actually.
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-functioning Businesswoman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:36 am
Fushigi na Butterfly Except for, you know, this one book. Best seller I hear. Begins with a b I think? The Bible! Yeah. You know, except for that. -shrug- Personally, I've reconciled the two points of view. They kinda go together quite nicely, actually. The Bible says nothing about Intelligent Design. Intelligent Design is not a religious belief. Intelligent Design is (claimed to be) a scientific belief which leads to religious conclusions. Because the "science" is wrong and fallacious the religious conclusions are unsupported. Believing in God does not equate to supporting Intelligent Design. If anything, Intelligent Design is bad for religious beliefs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:59 am
Then perhaps my understanding of intelligent design is faulty. I thought it was simply the belief that God created the universe in six days and rested on the seventh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-functioning Businesswoman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:21 pm
Fushigi na Butterfly Then perhaps my understanding of intelligent design is faulty. I thought it was simply the belief that God created the universe in six days and rested on the seventh. Uh, no...That would be Literal Biblical Creationism...In other words, you believe in the Biblical creation story in a literal sense. Intelligent Design goes something like this: Here's one thing ===>It goes in this mysterious black box===>Here's another thing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:39 pm
Fushigi na Butterfly Then perhaps my understanding of intelligent design is faulty. I thought it was simply the belief that God created the universe in six days and rested on the seventh. No. Intelligent Design can be explained as this: "The current existence of the world or universe could not have arisen naturally; therefore, a divine being must have created or shaped it."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:10 pm
zz1000zz Goldenlici zz1000zz Intelligent Design is horrible. It is disregarded in more serious discussions because it lacks any validity. Intelligent Design effectively says, "Science is wrong so God must be real." It is not a religious argument, as it is not based upon any religious principle. It is simply an attack on the scientific institution, and it is one unsupported by evidence, relying upon logical fallacies instead. Supporters of Intelligent Design are roughly equivalent to Luddites, relying upon bigotry and rhetoric to support selfish desires. It is unfortunate so many people have been fooled by this set of "beliefs." Excuse me, but you are being very rude. It is one thing to say that you do not believe in Intelligent Design, but it is quite another to condemn all those who do believe as lunatics. You are speaking in all abstracts and it sounds as if you do not even know the "logical fallacies" and "bigotry and rhetoric" that you mention. How is it rude? Is saying a liar is a liar rude? I have never claimed people who "believe" in Intelligent Design are lunatics. I would imagine most are simply misled, while a few are dishonest. You don't classify that as rude? Quote: Goldenlici I believe in Intelligent Design and I have debated with many people about evolution, including Lethkar. But, I have never once called evolution "horrible." If you have something serious that you would like to say about the topic, be my guest, but please be more respectful. If evolution is as logical as you claim, then you would not need to slander Intelligent Design to prove your point. Frankly, there is "logical" support for both sides, and it all comes down to which facts you decide to "believe" are more logical for yourself. Intelligent Design is a baseless attack on science. There is no "logical support" for it. You accuse me of "slander," but I am simply stating facts. Those facts happen to be quite damning for Intelligent Design, but this does not make them "slander." In fact, the ultimate defense against slander charges is accuracy. If you truly believe the things I say are "slander," then you should show how things I have said are not completely accurate. Ultimately, there is not a single legitimate reason to "believe" in Intelligent Design. I believe in Creationism. That's a narrower view of Intelligent Design. You don't see me "baselessly attacking" science. As for logical support, evolution relies largely on coincidence. ID (intelligent design) states that this universe is so complex that something had to have made it. It could not have been left to chance. That is, at the very least, as logical as evolution. As for your "facts", neither theory is proven, which makes it a matter of opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 6:51 pm
zz1000zz Fushigi na Butterfly Then perhaps my understanding of intelligent design is faulty. I thought it was simply the belief that God created the universe in six days and rested on the seventh. No. Intelligent Design can be explained as this: "The current existence of the world or universe could not have arisen naturally; therefore, a divine being must have created or shaped it."
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-functioning Businesswoman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:41 pm
xxPromarkxx I believe in Creationism. That's a narrower view of Intelligent Design. You don't see me "baselessly attacking" science. As for logical support, evolution relies largely on coincidence...As for your "facts", neither theory is proven, which makes it a matter of opinion. You crack me up every time. lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
