Posted on 09/01/2005 8:52:24 AM PDT by Para-Ord.45
You need to at least learn what evolution is about before you enter these threads. Evolution explains biodiversity, not the start of life.
"Chaos theory says that there is pattern, order, predictability even in "random" or high entropy events and processes. "
That makes not sense at all.
"People have observed for centuries that the moon and sun often appear the same size in the sky. How is the ability to view eclipses connected to the ability to support life?
"It occurred to me - the best place in the solar system to view a solar eclipse is also the best place in the solar system to support complex life," Gonzalez says. "Is that just a coincidence?""
A number of things are happening here. One, Gonzalez is very weak in his scientific reasoning. Scientists need to patiently demolish his ideas, which is not very difficult to do.
Two, religious people are supporting these kinds of weak scientific ideas for religious reasons. There is nothing wrong with people doing this. There's no such thing as a legitimate way to build a barrier between religious thoughts and scientific thoughts. Real scientists need to keep their heads emotionally and simply keep refuting these ideas based on fact and logic. Ultimately, if ideas like this win out, it means we are living in a theocracy. However, we are nowhere close to that at this point in time. Therefore, ideas like this have no real chance in the scientific marketplace.
Three, Leftist are jumping in and turning this into a political battle. As usual, the Left is wrong on this one. we cannot quote "ban" religious thinking from science. such a being in would be inimical to science, which by its definition is open to logical attack from all comers. Leftists want to destroy science in America, just like they want to destroy everything else.
This whole issue is a good example of why the Republican Party needs to consist of more than Christian Fundamentalists.
Cite, please.
You are too funny. It's been years since I've encountered anyone who takes Velikovsky seriously! Also, check your facts about impacts. Every solid surfcaed plannet and moon has them in abundance, even Earth. also check you knowledge of other solar systems. Our detection techniques can only detect the types of systems you describe, not all possible systems.
I try not to deal in abstracts. So until we find this really cool planet, I'll withhold comment.
I doubt it. The original premise ("we are unique, therefore we have been designed") is so bogus, that it's not really part of any ID theory - it's just some guy's opinion.
I've seen it said that "ID is true because common sense says that ID is true".
Common sense says that the sun goes around the Earth, as well.
Darwin, "probably all the organic beings which have ever lived on this earth, have descended from some one primordial form, into which life was first Breathed."
So Darwin used the word "breathed". By what,whom?
Present day darwinian priests fear treading into this area and freak if anyone proposes any theory.
That, and Ted Holden is back.
Ha! Wrong thread for THAT! ;->
My point is only that the original assumption is absurd. The Earth's uniqueness (or lack of same) doesn't have anything to do with whether ID is true or not, that I can see.
So if you can't "see" it, it can't be true? Sounds fair to me.
I most certainly said no such thing.
The original author said that since we are unique, ID must be true.
I am merely stating that that logic is bogus.
WTH are you on about?
YOU are the one who said there's no such planet because you didn't learn about it in astronomy 101.
Am I correct in saying that scientific theories are considered true until proven absolutely false?
I summoned PH because he is the keeper of the ping list, sport. It's nice to know he scares you witless, though.
Considered by whom?
I know it. And when I ping PH because he keeps the ping list I catch hell from the creo types (who sorta remind me of certain banned posters...) who seem to run scared from him.
Yes, scientific theories are considered to be true by the majority of the scientific community.
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.