Posted on 04/18/2008 4:04:57 PM PDT by PurpleMountains
I WANT IDers to speak. Could someone PLEASE tell me what the scientific evidence is for ID?
Do you have any empirical evidence for ID?
evolve from nothing...????
...you mean like darwinism/evolution evolved from nothing?
YES! If a virus can't evolve from nothing, how can an intelligent designer evolve from nothing. Who designed God?
WELL said.
Two things are clearly obvious:
1. The movie is striking a nerve much like the frustration you see on the left with global warming.
Turns out all the so called science isn’t... ummmm a matter of concensus after all!
2. The more that free ideas are exchanged the more they get wound up.
Not really
the periods during which species have undergone modification, though long as measured in years, have probably been short in comparison with the periods during which they retain the same formwritten in 1869 by a chap called Charles Darwin, you may have heard of him.
well...luckily the rest of us realize the human mind has not yet fully understood our beginnings...and there’s much still to be leaqrened, but frankly it never will.
BTW, Darweenism came from nothing.
How come NONE of the IDers here have posted any supporting evidence for ID even though I ask over and over again. Instead, they attack Darwin who isn’t even a regietered user.
God also created apes. Have you ever heard of The Bullfrog Affair?
Now I have to play devil’s (for those that believe that kind of stuff) advocate. I have seen you repeatedly ask for scientific/empirical evidence for ID. Can you provide scientific or empirical evidence for the origin of life?
Funny how what passes for “science” always chooses to ignore the supernatural for science’s sake, when science is supposed to be about learning, NOT being angry at God.
Science has been hijacked.
It was the natural discipline for the Goreacles to insert themselves as all-knowing masters.
Whole libraries full. I have done so on other threads and will do so again (A ring species is a situation in which two populations which do not interbreed are living in the same region and connected by a geographic ring of populations that can interbreed. Famous examples of ring species are the herring and lesser black-backed gulls in northern Europe and the Ensatina salamanders of California. A ring species can be best imagined like this: Consider a species that is geographically distributed in a straight line from east to west across America: it is possible that the forms in the east and west are so different that they could not interbreed. Now imagine taking the line and bending it into a circle, such that the end points (formerly in the east and west) come to overlap in space. If they do not interbreed then the geographic distribution of the species will be in the shape of a ring, and they will be 'ring species': the extreme forms do not interbreed in the region of overlap. A ring species has an almost continuous set of intermediates between two distinct species, and these intermediates happen to be arranged in a ring. At most points in the ring, there is only one species; but there are two where the end-points meet. The image opposite is of the herring and lesser black-backed gulls in northern Europe: while they are two reproductively isolated species, there is a continuous set of interbreeding forms between them.) Now, what is the empirical evidence for ID?
Anyone can make up the supernatural. Prove that life wasn't designed by a supernatural ham sandwich (with my homegrown horseradish mustard).
I hope you’re right in that most scientists are believers...but if they are, they’re not involved in academics! Not science not ANY subject, all too often.
And that IS what the movie is about. Science has been hijacked in the universities by people angry at God.
I hope you’re right in that most scientists are believers...but if they are, they’re not involved in academics! Not science not ANY subject, all too often.
And that IS what the movie is about. Science has been hijacked in the universities by people angry at God.
I beg your pardon, but many aspects of politically correct macroevolution ideas are not based on scientific fact any more than ID is. For example, the claim by evolutionists that single-cell organisms evolved into humans over billions of years has never been substantiated by the consistent results of repeatable, scientific-method based experiments. This is for the simple reason that proper experimentation that would conclusively verify such claims would likewise take billions of years to conduct; an impossibility.
Also, experiments that have attempted to simulate billions of years of evolution tended to show that mutations were harmful.
The bottom line is that evolution "scientists" long ago faced the fact that they could not substantiate their claims by proper experimentation. So they resorted to putting on their lawyers hats and attacked Christianity by selling their inconclusive evolution evidence to the "jury," that's people like you and me. This actually worked in their favor because most people evidently don't understand the importance of scientific method experimentation in verifying scientific facts.
The term “Intelligent Design” was coined by the Discovery Institute, a non-profit company that was incorporated specifically to get the story of Genesis taught in public schools (as specifically stated in the incorporation documents). To that end a Creationist textbook was published called Of Pandas and People.
In 1987, The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that teaching creationism in public schools violated the separation of church and state in Edwards vs. Aquilard.
In a similar later case, Kitzmiller vs. The Dover Area School District involving the school’s acquisition of Of Pandas and People, it was proven in court that the publishers and the people who financed the purchase lied in depositions when they stated that Intelligent Design wasn’t just another term for Creationism. They did this by showing that dozens of passages in the pre-1987 Edwards vs. Aquilard copies of the book used “Creation”, while later versions substituted “Intelligent Design” in its place.
The entire Intelligent Design movement is a dishonest, legalistic Trojan horse specifically intended to teach creationism in public school even though it is against the law.
Knowing ID’ers are liars, lawbreakers, and hypocrites.
Complete transcripts of Kitzmiller vs. Dover can be found here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/kitzmiller_v_dover.html
OR you’re not exactly in the right area...
You are very well informed on ID. Could you provide the empirical evidence that convinced you?
Because idiots like algoreacle have hijacked science and want to dictate to all including Christians what science is, and DEMAND that God somehow be removed from science, gubmint, and all things public.
I love the sheer arrogant fascism: keep God behind closed doors on Sundays where he belongs...so I don’t somehow have to be exposed to Him!
just does wonders for your “argument”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.