Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Ol' Dan Tucker
If I believed in intelligent design, then it might not be unreasonable.

It is not as though intelligent design has no basis in reality. A good many examples can be set forth by virtue of human invention.

Now, how about my question? Got proof?

I do not consider proof to be the be-all and end-all of science. It is only one among many tools science can use to arrive at knowledge. If proof is all you expect of science, then you expect too much.

1,353 posted on 12/20/2005 4:41:41 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1331 | View Replies ]


To: Fester Chugabrew
It is not as though intelligent design has no basis in reality. A good many examples can be set forth by virtue of human invention.

IOW, no proof.

I do not consider proof to be the be-all and end-all of science. It is only one among many tools science can use to arrive at knowledge. If proof is all you expect of science, then you expect too much.

I do.

I expect that someone who makes absolute claims should provide the evidence that proves what they're saying is true.

Intelligent Design is all about faith, which by definition, is about believing in the absence of proof.

1,373 posted on 12/20/2005 4:52:06 PM PST by Ol' Dan Tucker (Karen Ryan reporting...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1353 | View Replies ]

To: Fester Chugabrew
A good many examples can be set forth by virtue of human invention.

Fester, do you really believe that? I mean, you're as hard to get through to as a Democrat that thinks if we just be nice to the terrorists they'll go back to Iran and stop the killing.

Now, concentrate with me on this.

Just because humans can "design" things, is irrelevant to whether life was "designed" by a deity.

You see, humans weren't around back then, and there's no evidence we can examine that any deity was, so we have to use evidence we can see here and now. And what we see is a process science has called evolution.

How the first life came to be is a bit more murky. Maybe a deity did that. There's no evidence of that, and I don't think it was necessary given the rules of chemistry, but maybe so.

That leaves the question of where the universe and those rules of chemistry came from. Maybe a deity did that to, but I see know reason to think so, because it's far more difficult that a deity came into existence from nothing first, than to believe that the universe exists in the first place (I really don't buy into the Big Bang, that was initially promoted by religious people, and a steady state universe that has existed for eternity is far more believable to me)

1,470 posted on 12/20/2005 6:08:26 PM PST by narby (Hillary! The Wicked Witch of the Left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1353 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson