The fact that archaeologists can't explain how the Egyptians could have built the pyramids proves that they were a product of Super Inteligent Design. 
Posted on 02/07/2005 8:16:39 AM PST by metacognative
Except for the 95 percent who won't accept anything beyond a finch's beak changing size.
First, what it isn't: the theory of intelligent design is not a religiously based idea, even though devout people opposed to the teaching of evolution cite it in their arguments.
And only those people, but that's just a coincidence. (Yeah, right!)
________________________________________________________
Logic could be your friend if you'd let it. You cannot determine the veracity of statements by analyzing its adherents. Virtually all atheists accept evolution, but that tells us nothing about the veracity of the claims entailed in evolutionary theory.
After two centuries of research, we still really don't know how the pyramid builders did it. Did they lever the stones up tier by tier, or build a ramp which wrapped around the pyramid, or a huge external ramp?
There's a very good chance that we will never know. Yet (I hope) no one seriously thinks that we should therefore entertain the idea that they were floated into place by supernatural means.
Archaelogy is a very good analogy.
After two centuries of research, we still really don't know how the pyramid builders did it. Did they lever the stones up tier by tier, or build a ramp which wrapped around the pyramid, or a huge external ramp?
There's a very good chance that we will never know. Yet (I hope) no one seriously thinks that we should therefore entertain the idea that they were floated into place by supernatural means.
__________________________________________________________
Oh, no. I'm quite sure they were built up by the gradual accumulation of natural processes. I'm afraid someone is going to conclude that the pyramids were designed. Pffffffffft.
What kind of designer would put a recreation facility right next to a sewage pipe?
What kind of designer would put a recreation facility right next to a sewage pipe?
_________________________________________________________
If you don't like the arrangement you are free to alter it. If you like it, what's your point?
Ken Miller is a fraud. He claims to be Catholic, but his book does not describe anything like any christian belief. His refutation [in quotes?] of Behe merely claims a paperweight isn't irreducibly complex. Ridiculous, and only palatalbe to true believers with closed, old fashioned, minds.
The fact that archaeologists can't explain how the Egyptians could have built the pyramids proves that they were a product of Super Inteligent Design.
Behe is a modern scientist who looked at the evidence through a modern scientific microscope. Darwinists want to live in the past and pretend that 'protoplasm' can evolve by mistake.
Repeatability, man. Exactly how they did it isn't all that important since it is very easy to demonstrate any number of ways that they could have done it that don't require supernatural intervention.
Right now we can't demonstrate evolution. We can only infer from second hand observation.
Then why do the ID'ers complain so much when it's pointed out that the designer did a lousy job in many cases; and that any designer would have needed another designer to design her. She seems rather cruel to have designed tsunamis and Huntington's corea.
Because evolution does not postulate supernatural involvement. It is a valid scientific hypothesis.
SO9
"The strong appearance of design allows a disarmingly simple argument: if it looks, walks and quacks like a duck, then, absent compelling evidence to the contrary, we have warrant to conclude it's a duck. Design should not be overlooked simply because it's so obvious."
But She did give us an immune system to somewhat handle sometimes the infectious agents She Designed to kill us.
Her Designer must have been One Tough Old Mamma, though, maybe even tougher than Delia Darrow.
>> If this is what ID amounts to, one wonders what its proponents do to occupy their time.<<
Instead of wasting their lives trying to figure out what made the legos, they spend their time making things with the legos. 8^>
...the theory of intelligent design is not a religiously based idea, ...
Then why do the ID'ers complain so much when it's pointed out that the designer did a lousy job in many cases; and that any designer would have needed another designer to design her. She seems rather cruel to have designed tsunamis and Huntington's corea.
__________________________________________________________
Just so you don't embarrass yourself. Most theists believe in some version of a "fall" to explain the bad things, disease, malformations etc. that exist. And most theists will not take offense at the observation that evil poses a theological problem for them. All religions are full of explanations for evil. All religions including evolatria.
Intelligent design and evolution do not have to be mutually exclusive. Certainly an evolving universe (and hence evolving life) could be part of a master plan, if one chooses to believe that.
Design is against my religion. I want to believe in dumb luck only!
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.