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

To: js1138

What I find amazing is that some darwinists have so little grasp of the topic that they confuse creationism (literal translation of Genisis) with inteligent design (living things possess characteristics that indicate an intelligent cause or agent).

Owl_Eagle

(If what I just wrote makes you sad or angry,

 it was probably sarcasm)

258 posted on 09/20/2005 9:31:00 AM PDT by End Times Sentinel (In Memory of my Dear Friend Henry Lee II)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies ]


To: Owl_Eagle
What I find amazing is that some darwinists have so little grasp of the topic that they confuse creationism (literal translation of Genisis) with inteligent design (living things possess characteristics that indicate an intelligent cause or agent).

Most don't - it's just that Creationists tend to use the guise of Intelligent Design to cloak Creationism in a scientific wrapper.

The problem with ID, is that it does in fact require a supernatural creator. If aliens seeded the life on earth, then who created the aliens. If life is too complex to arise by anything but Intelligent Design, then the ultimate designer would have to be supernatural.

275 posted on 09/20/2005 9:38:10 AM PDT by JeffAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies ]

To: Owl_Eagle
What I find amazing is that some darwinists have so little grasp of the topic that they confuse creationism (literal translation of Genisis) with inteligent design (living things possess characteristics that indicate an intelligent cause or agent).

Probably because many of the big guys in the ID movement have let slip at one time or another that their real aim is to get religion back into biology.

It's too bad they let that 'Wedge Document' get out.

Governing Goals
* To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural and political legacies.
* To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and human beings are created by God.

If you really, truly believe ID is anything other than a camel's nose poking into the tent, you're being played for a sucker.

291 posted on 09/20/2005 9:44:53 AM PDT by Right Wing Professor (It ain't compassion when you're using someone else's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies ]

To: Owl_Eagle
What I find amazing is that some darwinists have so little grasp of the topic that they confuse creationism (literal translation of Genisis) with inteligent design.

That would be because ID advocates never say what it is they believe. I have been asking for over a month for an ID advocate to spell out what they would teach if they were in charge of schools. Saying there are gaps in scientific explanations is almost a tautaulogy. It's a pretty short lesson plan.

And it doesn't suggest any research that isn't already being done. Filling gaps in knowledge is what science does.

Design is a given. Natural selection is the designing agent. If you have a better candidate for the designer, please describe the characteristics of the designer. What are the design objectives, the methods and processes by which new species are created? What kinds of evidence should we be looking for that would not be expected by or consistent with natural selection?

296 posted on 09/20/2005 9:46:55 AM PDT by js1138 (Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies ]

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