Evidence for Design?

[grannymh]

God doesn’t need a textbook nor do those who - even the archsceptic
David Hume - see evidence of Design throughout Creation…

I do not mean to be disrectful to God. However, in this country, I doubt if He is a member of a teachers’ union.

Please keep in mind that I am trying to understand what is meant by teaching Intelligent Design along with scientific theories in schools.

 

[grannymh]

Is the contention here that something cannot be if it is not in a textbook?

No.

I’m trying to search out what it means to teach Intelligent Design which I presumed would be in a school. However, I did expand the ID “textbook” to

There are creationist science text books – which one does ID leaders endorse? Or do ID leaders give a school a list of preferred books? If so, what are these?

 

[grannymh]

That is actually nonsense. DNA IS information and it IS code. However, the coder is not a designer, but simply cumulative natural selection. Living organisms are driven not just by the laws of physics, but by information accumulated over billions of years of history – information gathered by cumulative natural selection.

Increase of information can take place by, for example, gene duplication (a common, routine phenomenon), and mutation of one copy of the gene, making two genes. No designer required for that, once the laws of nature are in place – if these are designed is another question (I would reply in the affirmative).

Thanks for putting granny-type ideas into words.

 

[grannymh]

I think the book bought by the school board in the Dover trial was called Of Pandas and People. It emerged that it started out as a creationist book until a quick global edit was done (change God to agent, etc.) to make it look scientific.

Ken Miller exposes the sorry business in the following talk, and from memory also demolishes a lot of the claims made on this thread. But he’s a Catholic and a biology professor, who made the effort to learn his subject in depth, so obviously doesn’t know nearly as much as one of those ID websites with their nice graphics.

youtube.com/watch?v=JVRsWAjvQSg

That global edit rings a bell. It may have been on CAF. However, as a Catholic, I am a tad prejudiced against calling God an agent. Fundamentalists, creationists, and ID advocates can call God whatever they wish. I prefer the Catholic approach to God – especially the Seven Sacraments.

 

[inocente]

No.

I’m trying to search out what it means to teach Intelligent Design which I presumed would be in a school. However, I did expand the ID “textbook” to

There are creationist science text books – which one does ID leaders endorse? Or do ID leaders give a school a list of preferred books? If so, what are these?

Apart from the book mentioned in post #2198, there’s one by the Discovery Institute called Explore Evolution. However, my security software stopped me going to the book’s website, reporting “This domain or a related subdomain was detected as a confirmed phishing site in November 2011”. So you’re warned, don’t go there.

 

[inocente]

That global edit rings a bell. It may have been on CAF. However, as a Catholic, I am a tad prejudiced against calling God an agent. Fundamentalists, creationists, and ID advocates can call God whatever they wish. I prefer the Catholic approach to God – especially the Seven Sacraments.

If you look at Ken Miller’s talk (again from memory) the ID camp actually did a global edit on the text of the book, causing grammatical errors, and reprinted it in such a hurry that the mistakes went uncorrected.

 

[tonyrey]

1. What is the "other evidence?
2. Do you believe there is no or very little evidence of Design in the universe?
3. If there is what is that evidence?
4. If not why did God leave no evidence?
5. What is “all the evidence pointing to the contrary”?
6. Do you believe science explains every single event that occurs in the world?
7. Do you reject all the evidence for miracles - including all those recognised by the Church?
8. Why did Jesus tell His followers they would work miracles in His name?
9. Does the intercession of the saints in heaven count for nothing?
10. Why would God work miracles so rarely?
11. Would you never pray for a miracle if people you know are gravely ill?

1. Philosophical arguments for the existence of God are all based on facts about the physical universe which presuppose Design rather than a purposeless system - in which, for example, morality wouldn’t otherwise make sense.
2. It seems implausible that fine tuning is applied only to the initial conditions and not to any of the subsequent stages of development. There would be no guarantee of success unless there were some degree of divine control and direction.
3. The immense complexity of the universe greatly increases the probability of failure without divine intervention - a fact borne out by the extinction of many species and on several occasions almost all life on earth.
4. The very existence of rational beings on this planet is a miracle - and not only from a spiritual point of view - because the immense complexity of the human brain is an essential basis for the control of physical objects and the communication of thoughts and emotions.
5. The amount of suffering in the world could be far greater than it is when one considers the extent to which the human race is responsible for pollution, destruction of the habitat and the extinction of so many species.
6. The miracles recognised by the Church and specialists in medicine are sufficient for anyone who believes in the teaching of Jesus that God is a living Father who answers our prayers .
7. If the apostles didn’t work miracles the New Testament is not a reliable historical record.
8. Answers to prayer through the normal working of the world are not sufficient to cure every disease and infirmity.
9. Finite laws are not infallible guarantees of success for billions of living organisms over a period of billions of years in billions of different circumstances. It is not a question of divine incompetence but physical necessity. It is impossible for the laws of nature to cater for every single contingency - as we soon discover if we are the victims of an accident or disaster for which no one is responsible.
10. Let’s hope your prayers for a miracle are answered when the time comes - as it will do sooner or later for all of us.

 

[Al_Moritz]

1. It seems implausible that fine tuning is applied only to the initial conditions and not to any of the subsequent stages of development. There would be no guarantee of success unless there were some degree of divine control and direction.

That implies God is not smart enough to plan and create a process that does exactly what He wants. No guarantee of success? You think God is as dumb as human designers who have to correct here and there? You really don’t seem to have much confidence in Divine Providence when it comes to the issue of it being Almighty, do you?

 

[inocente]

1. The immense complexity of the universe greatly increases the probability of failure without divine intervention - a fact borne out by the extinction of many species and on several occasions almost all life on earth.

It’s illogical to say that something not happening is evidence that it does. The evidence that God didn’t intervene on several occasions can’t be used to argue that He intervened on others. If you want to say that God has intervened to prevent extinction events, you need to find evidence for one which He prevented.

And you’re still saying God did such a poor job that He has to intervene. While you may find the universe complicated, it doesn’t follow that God finds the universe complicated.

 

[Al_Moritz]

And you’re still saying God did such a poor job that He has to intervene. While you may find the universe complicated, it doesn’t follow that God finds the universe complicated.

Precisely, see also my post above.

 

[vz71]

That implies God is not smart enough to plan and create a process that does exactly what He wants. No guarantee of success? You think God is as dumb as human designers who have to correct here and there? You really don’t seem to have much confidence in Divine Providence when it comes to the issue of it being Almighty, do you?

Please provide documentation showing this to be the only possible reason for God to interact with his creation.

 

[LittleSoldier]

I do not mean to be disrectful to God. However, in this country, I doubt if He is a member of a teachers’ union.

Please keep in mind that I am trying to understand what is meant by teaching Intelligent Design along with scientific theories in schools.

If a subject is being considered for inclusion in a class (whether in high school or college) there needs to be a comprehensive textbook which presents the material in a formal way; otherwise students end up relying only on their instructors (and online articles which may have been chosen by a poster because what the articles state agrees with what the poster believes) which may lead to the following (admittedly loopy) conversation in a college class on ID:

student: Doctor, what exactly is ID? I’m really confused!
instructor: ID tells us that the Flying Spaghetti Monster has endowed all earthly organisms with the ability to pass along secret coded messages which are always beneficial to a population of species and that these species were created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster because he’s weird and that’s why we have ended up with animals such as the duck-billed platypus and why flamingos are pink and why ostriches hide their heads in the sand and why cobra lilies eat flies and why crop circles appear overnight and why the Leaning Tower of Pisa leans.
student: With all due respect, doctor, I am reporting you to the appropriate college office. You are obviously deranged.
instructor: Prove that I’m wrong. There is no textbook so how do you know that I have not correctly described ID?
student: Beam me up, Scotty. There is definitely no intelligent life on this planet. Or at least there won’t be after you have beamed me up.

---

I just received a book by Dawkins. I haven’t started reading it yet. I already know that I will not agree with him and didn’t really waste any money on the book because I bought it for about one cent plus shipping (it’s hardback and in mint condition, too). I want to know what he says. If I don’t read his book (and I actually should read all of them) how do I know if what I have been told he claims is really what he claims?

There should be a textbook on ID. If there is such a textbook I would read it if I could afford to buy it; if not, perhaps I could borrow it. If there is a class on ID there should be a textbook to be used in the class. There are always conflicting ideas about theories. I’m sure that there are conflicting ideas about ID - even among people who believe in ID.

I don’t know why granny wants a textbook but I know why I want one - I’m used to the system of college classes and textbooks, feel comfortable with that system, and want to have a neatly bound authoritative book which I can access at any time.

 

[LittleSoldier]

That implies God is not smart enough to plan and create a process that does exactly what He wants. No guarantee of success? You think God is as dumb as human designers who have to correct here and there? You really don’t seem to have much confidence in Divine Providence when it comes to the issue of it being Almighty, do you?

I agree. God is omniscient and omnipotent; surely He has the ability to know everything about everything and to design any number of universes which follow His plan. He is God, after all - infallible and truly perfect. *We *certainly couldn’t do it but then we aren’t divine as God is.

 

[LittleSoldier]

1. Philosophical arguments for the existence of God are all based on facts about the physical universe which presuppose Design rather than a purposeless system - in which, for example, morality wouldn’t otherwise make sense.
2. It seems implausible that fine tuning is applied only to the initial conditions and not to any of the subsequent stages of development. There would be no guarantee of success unless there were some degree of divine control and direction.
3. The immense complexity of the universe greatly increases the probability of failure without divine intervention - a fact borne out by the extinction of many species and on several occasions almost all life on earth.
4. The very existence of rational beings on this planet is a miracle - and not only from a spiritual point of view - because the immense complexity of the human brain is an essential basis for the control of physical objects and the communication of thoughts and emotions.
5. The amount of suffering in the world could be far greater than it is when one considers the extent to which the human race is responsible for pollution, destruction of the habitat and the extinction of so many species.
6. The miracles recognised by the Church and specialists in medicine are sufficient for anyone who believes in the teaching of Jesus that God is a living Father who answers our prayers .
7. If the apostles didn’t work miracles the New Testament is not a reliable historical record.
8. Answers to prayer through the normal working of the world are not sufficient to cure every disease and infirmity.
9. Finite laws are not infallible guarantees of success for billions of living organisms over a period of billions of years in billions of different circumstances. It is not a question of divine incompetence but physical necessity. It is impossible for the laws of nature to cater for every single contingency - as we soon discover if we are the victims of an accident or disaster for which no one is responsible.
10. Let’s hope your prayers for a miracle are answered when the time comes - as it will do sooner or later for all of us.

If the laws of nature are created by God they are certainly able to “cater” to every single contingency. God has the power to create worlds with natural laws that are perfectly appropriate. He doesn’t *have *to intervene in His worlds but that doesn’t mean that He doesn’t. Also, God works in eternal time and we need to always keep this in mind. Complexity presents no problem to an omnipotent Being nor does chronological time.

God is not bound by what our human brains are capable of conceiving.

You seem to be placing restrictions on God’s omnipotence. Don’t you accept this part of His being?

 

[LittleSoldier]

That is what I think happens far more often – God moves souls. I believe that while God rarely intervenes in the natural order, He often intervenes in the supernatural order, which includes our soul.

Fitting into that picture is the fact that the most frequent miracle, the Holy Eucharist, is a miracle that takes place in the supernatural order; it is not a physical miracle, or rather, it is a miracle that does not constitute an obvious intervention in the physical world, like a miracle healing (or the Miracle of the Sun).

What about the times that the Host has actually become a piece of flesh, appearing as a piece of flesh instead of unleavened bread? Isn’t this a miracle that occurs in both the spiritual and physical realms?

 

[grannymh]

If a subject is being considered for inclusion in a class (whether in high school or college) there needs to be a comprehensive textbook which presents the material in a formal way; otherwise students end up relying only on their instructors (and online articles which may have been chosen by a poster because what the articles state agrees with what the poster believes) which may lead to the following (admittedly loopy) conversation in a college class on ID:

student: Doctor, what exactly is ID? I’m really confused!
instructor: ID tells us that the Flying Spaghetti Monster has endowed all earthly organisms with the ability to pass along secret coded messages which are always beneficial to a population of species and that these species were created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster because he’s weird and that’s why we have ended up with animals such as the duck-billed platypus and why flamingos are pink and why ostriches hide their heads in the sand and why cobra lilies eat flies and why crop circles appear overnight and why the Leaning Tower of Pisa leans.
student: With all due respect, doctor, I am reporting you to the appropriate college office. You are obviously deranged.
instructor: Prove that I’m wrong. There is no textbook so how do you know that I have not correctly described ID?
student: Beam me up, Scotty. There is definitely no intelligent life on this planet. Or at least there won’t be after you have beamed me up.

---

I just received a book by Dawkins. I haven’t started reading it yet. I already know that I will not agree with him and didn’t really waste any money on the book because I bought it for about one cent plus shipping (it’s hardback and in mint condition, too). I want to know what he says. If I don’t read his book (and I actually should read all of them) how do I know if what I have been told he claims is really what he claims?

There should be a textbook on ID. If there is such a textbook I would read it if I could afford to buy it; if not, perhaps I could borrow it. If there is a class on ID there should be a textbook to be used in the class. There are always conflicting ideas about theories. I’m sure that there are conflicting ideas about ID - even among people who believe in ID.

I don’t know why granny wants a textbook but I know why I want one - I’m used to the system of college classes and textbooks, feel comfortable with that system, and want to have a neatly bound authoritative book which I can access at any time.

granny is simply curious enough to want to know if a textbook exists because of all the talk about educating students in science classes. Inocente found one in his post 2204. His security program gave a warning about the book’s website.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8988210&postcount=2204

and a made over “creationist” one in posts 2198 & 2205
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8988081&postcount=2198

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8988225&postcount=2205

I doubt I would read an ID textbook. This thread is very clear about evidence for design. I have enough information so that now I can go beyond ID to some really serious issues regarding human nature and the Catholic doctrine of monogenism.

 

[LittleSoldier]

If you lived in the UK you would realise that the vast majority of parents have had little religious education and no longer belong to a church anyway. If school doesn’t fill the vacuum for children nothing will… That is why it is essential to counteract the propaganda of eminent scientists like Dawkins who abuse their academic position to preach that Design is a myth and that we exist purely by Chance…

I propose that the Church provide the necessary religious education for the parents and that the parents start taking some responsibility. Dawkins may abuse his academic position but as far as I know he *is *a scientist and his views are appropriate for a science class. The Church’s views are not appropriate for a science class.

Not having much religious education is no excuse. Parents are supposed to foster and nurture their children; this involves teaching. They are the primary teachers and need to understand their responsibility and authority.

If I lived in England and my son came home spouting nonsense that had been presented to him in a science class it would be my responsibility to teach him that what was presented to him is wrong and why it is wrong. (Remember that science can only provide evidence, not facts). An excuse like “well, my own Catholic education is really rotten” is not appropriate. Someday I would have to stand in front of God and try to use that excuse on Him. It would sound really silly. If my education is lacking then I need to take steps to fix the problem, especially if I have a child but even if I don’t.

Don’t Catholics in the UK have access to the CCC? Don’t they have homilies during Mass? Can’t they join CAF and learn in that way?

My nieces went to CCD classes when they were in high school. They got the typical lovey-dovey “teaching” but their mother put them straight. Now my nieces teach CCD classes and their students are walking out of those classes with true knowledge about Church teaching. Hopefully some of these students will end up teaching CCD classes and passing the true teachings on to others.

 

[LittleSoldier]

granny is simply curious enough to want to know if a textbook exists because of all the talk about educating students in science classes. Inocente found one in his post 2204. His security program gave a warning about the book’s website.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8988210&postcount=2204

Thanks. I missed that (this thread is moving so fast!) I think I’ll skip this one because of the warning or find another way to access it.

and a made over “creationist” one in posts 2198 & 2205
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8988081&postcount=2198

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8988225&postcount=2205

I will check these out. Thanks!

I doubt I would read an ID textbook. This thread is very clear about evidence for design. I have enough information so that now I can go beyond ID to some really serious issues regarding human nature and the Catholic doctrine of monogenism.

You’re way ahead of me. I’m lacking a lot of information and I think a textbook would help me. I need something I can mark up and highlight. It’s hard to do that using a computer! My only worry is the expense.

Thanks for the info!

 

[grannymh]

Thanks. I missed that (this thread is moving so fast!) I think I’ll skip this one because of the warning or find another way to access it.
I will check these out. Thanks!

You’re way ahead of me. I’m lacking a lot of information and I think a textbook would help me. I need something I can mark up and highlight. It’s hard to do that using a computer! My only worry is the expense.

Thanks for the info!

Do you know how blondes correct mistakes when composing on the computer?
They put white-out on the screen.

 

[tonyrey]

I propose that the Church provide the necessary religious education for the parents and that the parents start taking some responsibility. Dawkins may abuse his academic position but as far as I know he *is *a scientist and his views are appropriate for a science class. The Church’s views are not appropriate for a science class.

Not having much religious education is no excuse. Parents are supposed to foster and nurture their children; this involves teaching. They are the primary teachers and need to understand their responsibility and authority.

If I lived in England and my son came home spouting nonsense that had been presented to him in a science class it would be my responsibility to teach him that what was presented to him is wrong and why it is wrong. (Remember that science can only provide evidence, not facts). An excuse like “well, my own Catholic education is really rotten” is not appropriate. Someday I would have to stand in front of God and try to use that excuse on Him. It would sound really silly. If my education is lacking then I need to take steps to fix the problem, especially if I have a child but even if I don’t.

Don’t Catholics in the UK have access to the CCC? Don’t they have homilies during Mass? Can’t they join CAF and learn in that way?

My nieces went to CCD classes when they were in high school. They got the typical lovey-dovey “teaching” but their mother put them straight. Now my nieces teach CCD classes and their students are walking out of those classes with true knowledge about Church teaching. Hopefully some of these students will end up teaching CCD classes and passing the true teachings on to others.

In the UK only 6% of the population are Catholics and many don’t go to church. 66% of the population have no religion…