Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Uncommon Dissent-Intellectuals Who Find Darwinism Unconvincing (another book review)
Townhallcom ^ | December 13, 2004 | Chris Banescu

Posted on 12/13/2004 7:42:25 AM PST by Gritty

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 461-480481-500501-520521-532 last
To: Condorman
The question is, why should we assume design without evidence to justify such an assumption?

The question can easily be put the other way: Why should we not assume design is a part of every particle of the universe? As long as there is information for the human brain to interpret, it is there for a reason. At the very least it would not be available to human reason and sense unless it were "designed" in such a way as to make itself known.

I believe humans, as well as other species, are equipped with a certain amount of intuition (yet to be defined by science) that apprehends whether certain objects were fashioned by man, while others were fashioned by the "laws of nature." Even evolutionists know when they come across a tool that it was designed by dedicated human intelligence as opposed to the laws of nature. The problem is, that out of all the tools ever discovered or invented, not even their makers have been able to manufacture self-replicating material without the assistance of intelligence or design.

521 posted on 12/21/2004 7:12:43 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 520 | View Replies]

To: Condorman
Nature acts in regular ways.

I would expect as much, since God designed it. But what is "regular" to you is actually a miracle given the probabilities involved. You were born into the Law of Gravity as well as a host of other physical laws that govern every particle of the universe. It was old hat before you even realized you were a person. Thus you've never recognized the fact that, by all rights, you should never even have been born. Perhaps you never will, but I'll leave that up to God, since He knows what's best for all concerned.

In case you haven't noticed by now, there's more to life than science.

522 posted on 12/21/2004 7:22:35 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 520 | View Replies]

To: Condorman
Why are poorly-translated...

Says WHO???

523 posted on 12/22/2004 4:34:11 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 494 | View Replies]

To: Condorman
How many filaments did Edison test?

I don't know, but he DID test FILAMENTS; not water pumps.

He KNEW what he wanted.....

524 posted on 12/22/2004 4:36:29 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 497 | View Replies]

To: Condorman
4. Naive theological assumptions

Isn't this what you just did; in your next reply??

525 posted on 12/22/2004 4:38:03 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 493 | View Replies]

To: Condorman
You insist that an invisible, unknowable, all-powerful being is directing the creation and destruction of species on this planet, without providing a shred of evidence that such activities are taking place, and then turn around and accuse me of making unwarranted assumptions?!
 
 
Have you ever TRIED to 'know' Him??
 
 
Would you know where to start if you did?
 
 

526 posted on 12/22/2004 4:42:50 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 507 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew

This is your dandelion,

This is your dandelion on drugs.

Any questions?


527 posted on 12/22/2004 4:45:07 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 517 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew
Why should we not assume design is a part of every particle of the universe?

Occam's Razor. The universe has certain physical properties which govern particle interaction.

You have a problem. If you assume that complexity cannot arise without a design, then you have assume a designer. And then it's turtles all the way down.

As long as there is information for the human brain to interpret, it is there for a reason. At the very least it would not be available to human reason and sense unless it were "designed" in such a way as to make itself known.

Unsubstantiated assertions.

The problem is, that out of all the tools ever discovered or invented, not even their makers have been able to manufacture self-replicating material without the assistance of intelligence or design.

Are you back to the tired claim that because experiments are intelligently designed, they can only detect intelligently designed phenomenon?

528 posted on 12/22/2004 6:35:51 AM PST by Condorman (Changes aren't permanent, but change is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 521 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew
I would expect as much, since God designed it. But what is "regular" to you is actually a miracle given the probabilities involved.

The miracle of restrospective astonishment. Don't you know that when you look at your next bridge hand, the odds that those cards wound up in that particular combination in your hand will be 1 to 2.54 x 1012 against?

In case you haven't noticed by now, there's more to life than science.

As my Zen Master just told me, "There is also more to science than life." Now I have no idea what that means, but right now we ARE discussing science, and in particular, the science that describes a conceiveable process by which the wonderful diversity of life on this planet came to be. I have evidence, you have empty supposition. And while you may indeed have a lock on Universal Truth, until you have a valid scientific theory supported by hard evidence, ID and creationism do not belong in science classrooms.

529 posted on 12/22/2004 9:00:34 AM PST by Condorman (Changes aren't permanent, but change is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies]

To: Condorman
The universe has certain physical properties which govern particle interaction.

Oh? And where did these "certain physical properties" come from?

530 posted on 12/22/2004 10:45:01 AM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 528 | View Replies]

To: Condorman
Don't you know that when you look at your next bridge hand, the odds that those cards wound up in that particular combination in your hand will be 1 to 2.54 x 1012 against?

Wonders never cease.

531 posted on 12/22/2004 10:54:30 AM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 529 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew
And where did these "certain physical properties" come from?

I could hazard any number of guesses. The theory of evolution doesn't care.

532 posted on 12/22/2004 12:28:37 PM PST by Condorman (Changes aren't permanent, but change is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 530 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 461-480481-500501-520521-532 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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