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

To: count-your-change

[[Why is the who and the how of “no scientific currency”?]]

The who isn’t even part of ID- the How is- and whether nature is capable of the how, or something or someone else is- Some in ID have opinions about who or what was needed, but the evidence, like any forensic science investigation, only has to show the NEED for an intelligence behind the complexity- and to show that nature is incapable of creating the complexity- the evidnece is mounting in favor of the NEED for a Designer of some sort, and the evidence is mounting against Nature being capable of such feats. Some in ID feel that nature is stil lcapable of creating intelligent Deisng and metainformation- but they have yet to provide ANY evidence to show that nature could produce either- they simply have opinions, but also cede that complexity and information could not arise on it’s own- Some, like Demski- think nature was capable of supllying hte metainformaiton- but his ‘explanation’ is really whacked- likening it to a game of Red Rover where nature simpyl ‘sends the information right over’ (apparently those that think nature is capable of such feats, think nature to be an omnipotent designer- able to foretell what is needed, and to provide info in advance to deal with problems that haven’t arisen yet)


433 posted on 09/29/2009 10:57:32 PM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 430 | View Replies ]


To: CottShop
Within the context of the picture given in the post #429, I didn't take it as a reference to I.D. I was thinking more of the “who” being human, etc. and the “how” being that rocks don't move themselves about, well, you see what I mean. More i d than ID as it were.

“Physics says that it fell or was placed at some point, based on the gravity constraints and forces applied to it at the time.”

But why should an intelligent agency be excluded from consideration? In order for a rock to be moved to its present location gravity had to be overcome, force had to be applied, work done, energy expended, each in amounts sufficient to produce the observed results. And finally the observer becomes part of the process.

Humans move and exist in a physical world, subject to gravity and energy inputs and chemical reactions that would permit them to place a rock in the road by design so I see no reason to exclude as unimportant or unscientific that possibility because intelligence may be involved.

I understand what you are saying about the ID view and its variations among adherents. That is why I am not one of them, I have no trouble with pointing to a Creator, Designer and Producer of the universe or cosmos.
And since no one has a copyright on the words, “intelligent design”, I'll use them in this sense.

438 posted on 09/30/2009 12:42:17 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 433 | 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