Biology expert testifies. Professor: Intelligent design is creationism.

York Dispatch ^ | 9/27/05 | Christina Kauffman

[narby]

There is nothing in the Bible that states WHEN the Earth was created. Some guy, somewhere, worked backwards throught the genealogies ...

Aw, now ya gone and done it. Some YECer will go after you now.

It's too bad that an omnipotent God can't get all his believers believing the same thing.

[adam_az]

"The Evolutionist believes that there is no life after death and therefore can rape and pillage as his inclination desires. The believer, on the other hand, through the scripture, knows the result of this and is compelled to live virtuously since death will be done away with."

Oh please. That is one of the silliest things I've read yet on FR.

[metmom]

I have to disagree. My complaint and argument is with those evolutionists who seem unable to accept the fact that not all creationists believe in the young Earth. They accuse creationists as a whole of distorting science because of the young Earth theory. When the creationist doesn't believe in the young Earth, there would be no need to distort anything. No one is forcing evolutionists to have those incorrect beliefs of creationists so it is their chioce to believe it. I object when they lump all creationists into one category and dismiss them off hand because of the beliefs of a few. I would guess that a lot of those creationists who believe in it don't even know why they do, and because of the way it was calculated, wouldn't know why it's probably wrong.

[jennyp]

Just saying so does not make it so. The Evolutionist can justify rape and pillage as survival of the fittest at any time. I do not consider rape and pillage as meaningless.

And the creationist can justify eugenics as an attempt to intelligently design specific microevolutionary changes to the genome to improve the lives of the children.

Look, we're human beings. How we got to be human beings instead of just another species of chimpanzee is an interesting question, but it's irrelevant to questions of morality. To form a moral system and answer moral questions, you start with the fact that we are human beings, with certain universal needs & values that flow from our status as humans, and work from there.

[adam_az]

"Evolution is the theory which says that things like that just sort of happen."

No it is not, since engines are not living things that reproduce.

You're confusing evolution with the origin of life.

[Uncle Fud]

The Evolutionist believes that there is no life after death and therefore can rape and pillage as his inclination desires.

This accounts for the well known fact that there were no wars anywhere in the world prior to the publication of Origin of Species.

[Dr. Hog]

1) Life and reproduction are infinitely more complicated than a Ferrari engine. Your argument actually favors ID over evolution.

2) The Theory of Evolution presupposes life was created by natural forces. No scientific evidence exists about natural "creation" to my knowledge other than there is no other "scientific" explanation. I would love to hear or see the evidence if it exists.

3) Evolution of the type we are discussing has never been observed in recorded human history. Do plants and animals change? Yes. Have we ever observed them changing from one kind of animal to another or one plant to another? No. It is not factual to say we have observed species changeover.
As to prehistoric evidence about species changeover through the fossil record, I would say the evidence is not very persuasive or we wouldn't be having this discussion. I would like to see "the best" evidence available in the fossil record of species changeover; preferably in picture form.

4) Everybody has a point of view but that does not mean they are incapable of logic or reason that contradicts their assumptions. Science should be logic based on evidence. I want the very best single piece of evidence available that evolution is the explanation for the various life forms on earth.

[bobdsmith]

The Evolutionist believes that there is no life after death and therefore can rape and pillage as his inclination desires

The one factor you haven't considered is how tiring it can be to rape and pillage all day. Sometimes I prefer to just lie on on weekends.

[ZULU]

I thought Miller was stating that intellignet design means that God created organisms in their current physical state and no changes in form or substance occurred ovr the millenia.

The point I was trying to make is that I'm not sure what the intelligent design people are stating verus what the creationists are stating.

[Dimensio]

The Evolutionist can justify rape and pillage as survival of the fittest at any time.

Now you are deliberately and dishonestly missing the point. The fact is that when you said that all evolutionists do not believe in an afterlife, you were wrong. You set up a false dichotomy, and now you're arguing as though no one has disputed it even though a good number of people have pointed out that it is false. You are, like so many other creationists here, willing to argue lies because you don't have facts on your side.

[metmom]

Well, I think He tried. He wrote all the important stuff down. Since man has free will, He's not going to stop them from doing stuff like this. I have a real problem with things like that... people deducing something from Scripture and expecting all others to teach it and believe it or "they're not Christian". I realise that I probably have incurred that wrath of some creationists. Oh well. There are other areas I disagree with them on.

[going hot]

reminds me of gun control freaks.

They have no control of their impulses and more base thoughts, and believe every one is just as weak, therefore guns must be outlawed, because they can be used at weak moments.

This guy has the same argument. He is a weak individual, who relies on his firm belief that there is hellfire and brimstone waiting for those who sin, as the reason that most (who are religious) do not sin.

Hint: the Lord does not hold one's hand guiding them along the straight and narrow. They are free to choose, regardless of their personal beliefs.

[bobdsmith]

As to prehistoric evidence about species changeover through the fossil record, I would say the evidence is not very persuasive or we wouldn't be having this discussion

Does the mass of evidence that Apollo landed on the moon convince those who promote the conspiracy that it didn't?

The fossil record is plenty good enough to show a progression of life on earth over time.

[narby]

The Evolutionist can justify rape and pillage as survival of the fittest at any time.

That's one of the most insulting things I've seen for quite a while.

Did ModernMan or SeaLion say anything like this?

[Dr. Hog]

Such as?

[Junior]

Indeed. God will more readily accept an atheist who did the right thing because it was the right thing, than a "Christian" who does it for the reward or to avoid punishment.

[Gumlegs]

The Evolutionist[sic] can justify rape and pillage as survival of the fittest at any time.

And before 1859 those things never happened, right?

"Survival of the fittest" is a term describing a process observed in nature and is neither a prescription for a society nor a military strategy.

[going hot]

Zactly

[Dimensio]

The Theory of Evolution presupposes life was created by natural forces.

The theory of evolution makes no assumptions whatsoever regarding the ultimate origin of life.

[adam_az]

"No scientific evidence exists about natural "creation" to my knowledge other than there is no other "scientific" explanation. I would love to hear or see the evidence if it exists."

Research has shown that electricity passed through methane gas produces amino acids, the stuff of life. Early Earth had a methane rich atmosphere.

There is no scientific evidence for ID whatsoever. Using your criteria, it shouldn't be taught in science class.

BTW I am going to have spaghetti and meatballs for lunch!

Praise be the FSM and His Noodly Appendage!