B
buffalo
Guest
You may have missed the posts about natural selection. You can see it here and more:
- Status
B
buffalo
Guest
Then it must be demonstrated to be observable, repeatable and predictable.
Find some.
Post the pictures.
I am curious to see what you find.
Remember, you set up the parameters for these letters.
In sand, outlines of the letters, and spelling out SOS.
Rossum tried and failed.
Perhaps you will have better luck.
P
Peepers
Guest
Hold on there, the theory of evolution and the theory of natural selection (you need both for modern biology to work) have not been proven. They have been proposed and supported by more than 100 years of intensive scientific experimentation and exploration. They are the foundation of many scientific disciplines. It is unlikely that any person with a well rounded and modern education would try to refute them. But they have not been proven. Scientific theories are never proven.
T
tonyrey
Guest
Neither evolution nor natural selection excludes evolution by Design…
P
Peepers
Guest
Please explain that comment. i suspect that it means that evolution is by God’s design, which i would agree with.
My understanding of the intelligent design idea is that it precludes God because He MUST be designed by something else. in other words, God is obviously irreducible. therefore He must be a created entity since every irreducible thing must be designed. That is the premise of ID. the notion of Intelligent Design is false by its own parameters. that also exposes the whole idea of Intelligent Design to be blasphemy
B
buffalo
Guest
Seeking God in Science
](https://www.broadviewpress.com/product.php?productid=952&cat=0&page=1)
The doctrine of intelligent design is often the subject of acrimonious debate. Seeking God in Science cuts through the rhetoric that distorts the debates between religious and secular camps. Bradley Monton, a philosopher of science and an atheist, carefully considers the arguments for intelligent design and argues that intelligent design deserves serious consideration as a scientific theory.
Monton also gives a lucid account of the debate surrounding the inclusion of intelligent design in public schools and presents reason why students’ science education could benefit from a careful consideration of the arguments for and against it.
Comments:
"Seeking God in Science is a refreshing and fair-minded exploration of intelligent design arguments. Unlike the many ideologically-driven detractors of intelligent design, Monton refuses to set up a straw man, poison the well, or dismiss it as unscientific. Bradley Monton writes as “a friendly atheist”—one who seriously and honestly considers claims that challenge atheism. As such, this book is a welcome breakthrough."– Douglas Groothuis, Professor of Philosophy, Denver Seminary
“This is a brave and important book. Monton does not defend ‘intelligent design’ as true – he thinks it is most likely false. Instead, he defends it as a hypothesis worth taking seriously. He argues convincingly that it can be formulated as a scientifically testable hypothesis, and that there is some important empirical evidence for it – not as much evidence as its supporters claim there is, but some evidence. Virtually all voices in this debate insist either that ID is not even worth taking seriously or else that it is manifestly the truth. It is refreshing to see a talented philosopher give the thesis its due and make a serious attempt to weigh the evidence for and against it, without the weight of the ‘culture wars’ hanging over every sentence.” – John T. Roberts, Associate Professor of Philosophy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
“It’s about time that a competent analytic philosopher took a look at design-theoretic arguments in the sciences – and this because analytic philosophers have until now responded to serious challenges to prevailing orthodoxy by squirting out ink and indignation in equal measure. Bradley Monton’s book should be read by philosophers, biologists and physicists willing to keep their minds open long enough to let out the stale air and let in a few arguments.” – David Berlinski, Senior Fellow, Discovery Institute, Center for Science and Culture
“Bradley Monton has done the intellectual community an enormous service in writing this defense of intelligent design. As an atheist, he defends ID not because he thinks it is true. Rather, he shows how it raises important questions and how many critics, in their enthusiasm to kill the baby in the cradle, are short-circuiting a discussion that needs to happen. Monton understands that important questions are never resolved by ignoring or marginalizing them. By employing his considerable skills as an analytic philosopher, he brings clarity to this much controverted question of intelligent design.” – William A. Dembski, author of The End of Christianity
*
*
Bradley Monton is Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Colorado, Boulder.
Code:
[ An Atheist Defends Intelligent DesignThe doctrine of intelligent design is often the subject of acrimonious debate. Seeking God in Science cuts through the rhetoric that distorts the debates between religious and secular camps. Bradley Monton, a philosopher of science and an atheist, carefully considers the arguments for intelligent design and argues that intelligent design deserves serious consideration as a scientific theory.
Monton also gives a lucid account of the debate surrounding the inclusion of intelligent design in public schools and presents reason why students’ science education could benefit from a careful consideration of the arguments for and against it.
Comments:
"Seeking God in Science is a refreshing and fair-minded exploration of intelligent design arguments. Unlike the many ideologically-driven detractors of intelligent design, Monton refuses to set up a straw man, poison the well, or dismiss it as unscientific. Bradley Monton writes as “a friendly atheist”—one who seriously and honestly considers claims that challenge atheism. As such, this book is a welcome breakthrough."– Douglas Groothuis, Professor of Philosophy, Denver Seminary
“This is a brave and important book. Monton does not defend ‘intelligent design’ as true – he thinks it is most likely false. Instead, he defends it as a hypothesis worth taking seriously. He argues convincingly that it can be formulated as a scientifically testable hypothesis, and that there is some important empirical evidence for it – not as much evidence as its supporters claim there is, but some evidence. Virtually all voices in this debate insist either that ID is not even worth taking seriously or else that it is manifestly the truth. It is refreshing to see a talented philosopher give the thesis its due and make a serious attempt to weigh the evidence for and against it, without the weight of the ‘culture wars’ hanging over every sentence.” – John T. Roberts, Associate Professor of Philosophy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
“It’s about time that a competent analytic philosopher took a look at design-theoretic arguments in the sciences – and this because analytic philosophers have until now responded to serious challenges to prevailing orthodoxy by squirting out ink and indignation in equal measure. Bradley Monton’s book should be read by philosophers, biologists and physicists willing to keep their minds open long enough to let out the stale air and let in a few arguments.” – David Berlinski, Senior Fellow, Discovery Institute, Center for Science and Culture
“Bradley Monton has done the intellectual community an enormous service in writing this defense of intelligent design. As an atheist, he defends ID not because he thinks it is true. Rather, he shows how it raises important questions and how many critics, in their enthusiasm to kill the baby in the cradle, are short-circuiting a discussion that needs to happen. Monton understands that important questions are never resolved by ignoring or marginalizing them. By employing his considerable skills as an analytic philosopher, he brings clarity to this much controverted question of intelligent design.” – William A. Dembski, author of The End of Christianity
*
*
Bradley Monton is Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Colorado, Boulder.
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
Peepers
**My understanding of the intelligent design idea is that it precludes God because He MUST be designed by something else. in other words, God is obviously irreducible. therefore He must be a created entity since every irreducible thing must be designed. That is the premise of ID. the notion of Intelligent Design is false by its own parameters. that also exposes the whole idea of Intelligent Design to be blasphemy **
I’m having a serious problem following your logic. Intelligent Design says nothing more than that the universe and life appear to have been created by intelligent design. It does not follow that the intelligent designer must have been designed. Where do you get that? You sound more like the atheist Bertrand Russell who used this argument against the existence of God … that if there was a First Cause, who caused the First Cause?
The appearance of design in the universe does not require that we go to an endless chain of designing gods. That would be to fall right into the trap atheists have set for themselves … the view that a multi-verse means there must be an infinity of universes constantly giving birth to each other and therefore there is no need for God.
This notion is pure science fiction and hardly any serious scientist will tell you there is any substantive proof for it … regardless of what is seen in quantum mechanics. But you will find many atheists enamoured of the idea, and even a few Catholics willing to defend it as though they were for some strange reason obliged to allow the atheist’s need for an escape hatch from God.
**My understanding of the intelligent design idea is that it precludes God because He MUST be designed by something else. in other words, God is obviously irreducible. therefore He must be a created entity since every irreducible thing must be designed. That is the premise of ID. the notion of Intelligent Design is false by its own parameters. that also exposes the whole idea of Intelligent Design to be blasphemy **
I’m having a serious problem following your logic. Intelligent Design says nothing more than that the universe and life appear to have been created by intelligent design. It does not follow that the intelligent designer must have been designed. Where do you get that? You sound more like the atheist Bertrand Russell who used this argument against the existence of God … that if there was a First Cause, who caused the First Cause?
The appearance of design in the universe does not require that we go to an endless chain of designing gods. That would be to fall right into the trap atheists have set for themselves … the view that a multi-verse means there must be an infinity of universes constantly giving birth to each other and therefore there is no need for God.
This notion is pure science fiction and hardly any serious scientist will tell you there is any substantive proof for it … regardless of what is seen in quantum mechanics. But you will find many atheists enamoured of the idea, and even a few Catholics willing to defend it as though they were for some strange reason obliged to allow the atheist’s need for an escape hatch from God.
S
StrawberryJam
Guest
Ugg.
In Science, it is a constant seeking and searching, not a hand wringing ceremony.
In Science, it is a constant seeking and searching, not a hand wringing ceremony.
T
tonyrey
Guest
R
rossum
Guest
If you cannot keep numbers straight in your head then you will have difficulty with science.First 900 billion, then 2, now 3.
- 2 Chinese men.
- 3 Y-Chromosome DNA sequences.
- 900 billion mutation per generation in the human population.
We are discussing a piece of biological research here. We are not discussing a piece of ID research because you have not produced any for us to discuss.
Where is the scientific evidence for ID?
Perhaps that is why you are having some difficulties understanding the evidence. Coming from the ID side, where there is no evidence, it is presumably a completely new concept for you. Maybe you need to take some time to get used to the idea?
rossum
R
rossum
Guest
It does follow. If life is designed and the Intelligent Designer is alive then the Intelligent Designer is herself designed.
If life is designed then either the top-level designer is not alive or there is an infinite regress.
rossum
Are you really basing yourself on a study of only two people?
If the designer is not part of the universe, then it fits pefectly well.
R
rossum
Guest
Where do I state what is, and what is not, in the universe? My logic does not depend on entities being inside or outside the universe.
rossum
R
rossum
Guest
That is two people more than in any ID study you have quoted. Do you have any evidence to contradict the figure of 100 - 200 mutations per person? Is so then show us please.
A Y-chromosome contains just short of 60 million base pairs. Evolution has 60 million comparative data points. ID has none. Why aren’t you criticising ID for having zero data points?
ID does not have supporting scientific evidence.
rossum
OK, so it would appear you are basing your extropolation of the entire human population based upon the study of 2 people.
And actually, there is plenty of evidence to support ID.
Evidence has been provided you in this thread.
As have falsibility tests, definitions of terms, and theoretic hypothesis that later proved out.
You simply have been ignoring it all.
P
Peepers
Guest
It doesn’t really serve any purpose here to get into cut and paste wars, or arguments about science among non-scientists. Logic is also a funny thing. There are those who believe (using logic) that Aquinas is irrefutable, and those who think that the last blow to knock him down was Kant. Very smart people will use Anselm’s logic to prove that God does not exist (logically). In the end, you have faith, or you don’t. It is a personal journey. What form that takes, is also quite personal. I am still trying to get a picture of where the personal and internal aspects of that exist, and where the parts that come from the Church exist for Catholics.
- Status