Intelligent Design Is Creationism in a Cheap Tuxedo

Physics Today ^ | July 1, 2002 | Adrian L. Melott

[f.Christian]

Changing meaning-reality(creation)...

via your 'logic-reason' to your fantasy-bias world-bs(evolution)---

is called psychosis/evolution!

[TightSqueeze]

" . . . any view of the sciences that leaves Christ out of the picture must be seen as fundamentally deficient."

To illustrate how small this belief is, in sheer numbers, I would wager that the percentage of the world population who believes this is a mere fraction of the people who number themselves as homosexual.

[elephantlips]

I couldn't agree more! The study of science in all of its aspects was started by Christians and had no problem with God. Now, atheists want to hijack science as their own and make it say whatever they want.

[Free the USA]

Bump

[Raymond Hendrix]

Bla bla bla...

The Blind Atheist

[Frapster]

Of course, design has no predictive power. ID is not a scientific theory. If we had previously attributed the unexplainable to design, we would still be using Thor's hammer to explain thunder. Nor does ID have any technological applications. It can be fun to ask ID advocates about the practical applications of their work. Evolution has numerous practical technological applications, including vaccine development. ID has none.

It's funny when people say things like this. ID does not demand that we sit on our butts and accept what we see - humans obviously have minds and the desire to "know". We were created with that desire and there is nothing in what we know of God to indicate he wants to keep us in the dark. In fact, it's just the opposite - a proper understanding of the nature of God leads one to the conclusion that He does speak, He does reveal himself and it is a perfectly logical conclusion to realize that we can hear His voice. There is nothing hidden from us - we just have to go out and find it.

Evolution has numerous practical technological applications, including vaccine development.

I'm no scientist so I'd be curious to know - what are the practical applications of evolution?

[Still Thinking]

I'm no scientist so I'd be curious to know - what are the practical applications of evolution?

To explain where liberals came from.

[TightSqueeze]

I'm no scientist so I'd be curious to know - what are the practical applications of evolution?

Yes I can envision the next generation, home schooled, or schooled in ID junk science, directing America technology.
The net result of such thinking leads to hiding in caves and praying to god for deliverance from your enemies’ smart bombs, as we have seen in Afghanistan.

[Frapster]

Yes I can envision the next generation, home schooled, or schooled in ID junk science, directing America technology. The net result of such thinking leads to hiding in caves and praying to god for deliverance from your enemies’ smart bombs, as we have seen in Afghanistan.

lol - funny - such enlightened observation ignores the role that Christian scientists have played throughout history. Typical of modern day revisionist thinking.

[kinsman redeemer]

Yes I can envision the next generation, home schooled, or schooled in ID junk science, directing America technology.

So can I. Isn't it refreshing to have a reason for confidence! Thanks for your encouraging post.

[ClearCase_guy]

Michael Behe, a biochemist at Lehigh University and an ID proponent, argues that many biochemical and biophysical mechanisms are "irreducibly complex."4 He means that, if partially dismembered, they would not work, so they could not have evolved. This line of argument ignores the large number of biological functions that look irreducibly complex, but for which intermediates have been found.

In other words, there are some cases where it appears that evolution could not have occurred, but there are other cases where scientists feel there is some evidence that evolution could have occurred. Therefore, evolution occurred in all cases.

Not the best syllogism I've ever seen.

[TightSqueeze]

…such enlightened observation ignores the role that Christian scientists have played throughout history.

Show me the list of Bible-Thumpers who advanced science. I agree there were many scientists who were Christian, very few that placed their religion before science though. Who could forget the great theologian that probed the scriptures and pondered the equation of the age, E=mc. Yeah, and I am the one here accused of being a revisionist, right.

[balrog666]

A nice little article.

[SerpentDove]

>>..very few that placed their religion before science though.<<

Are you suggesting that science and religion are at odds? Interesting statement. I heartily disagree, if that's what you are saying.

[Catholicguy]

"Michael Behe, a biochemist at Lehigh University and an ID proponent, argues that many biochemical and biophysical mechanisms are "irreducibly complex."4 He means that, if partially dismembered, they would not work, so they could not have evolved. This line of argument ignores the large number of biological functions that look irreducibly complex, but for which intermediates have been found."
Hey, this guy is quoting a Catholic Christian scientist. Too bad he did so in the misdst of an incoherent arguement. Behe is absolutely correct and, obviously, he doesn't consider biological functions "irreducibly complex" if there exists evidence they are not.

Too bad the author hadn't evolved some logic along with the attitude. Panic has set in for the Cult of Darwin. Get the Kool Aid ready....

[kinsman redeemer]

I could do that, but your ramblings are misdirected. I think it's Frapster you want.

And it's : "E = mc²" by the way.

[That Subliminal Kid]

**YAWN**

[general_re]

Fairness, open discussion, and democracy are core American values and often problematic.

Can't find a much more leftist, control freakish, totalitarian statement than that.

Hardly - it's a simple truth, and one that should be obvious given a moment's reflection.