Does Intelligent Design Require a God or Super Natural Being?

[ImmortalFlame]

It's obvious you have no idea what this subject is.

Could you just answer my questions rather than insulting or patronizing me?

Anyways, you may not be ''presuming'' any such thing /that's your prerogative/, however, if you are not a Creationist, then you 'should' be, as a logical inference.

How, exactly? What am I presuming?

As to ''evidence'', I don't think you understand what ''evidence'', in this context means. There is a reason why the 'space goop'' theory is proposed. Guess the reason? Evidence.

You seem confused. How does presenting a hypothesis count as evidence? What evidence are you referring to?

It's quite simple. Earlier you said:

"Anyone saying there is no 'evidence' for I.D., should keep their day job."

If that's the case, where is the evidence?

 

[Dante Writer]

Indeed. But whether a movie is fraudulent, misrepresentative or dishonestly edited is incredibly relevant when you are using it as a source for a quotation.


Yes it did, since it explains that Dawkins wasn't saying what you were implying (that he accepts some form of panspermia is possible and that this is a viable explanation as to how intelligent design doesn't evoke a supernatural designer). He clearly states that even if we accept panspermia, we are still left with the problem of where the aliens came from. At some point there will have had to have been either some form of design or abiogensis.

No and the movie is the movie and Dawkin's quotes are not the movie.

Nothing added changed what I implied. He made it a possibility that life on this planet could be intelligently designed.

Nowhere did I say some evolutionary mechanism was not used in that process and I made it clear ID did not replace evolution.

You are trying to claim things I never implied for your own agenda.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Yes the evidence for Intelligent Design so far

Top U.S. Astronomers Tell Congress That Extraterrestrial Life Exists Without Question


Two top astronomers from the SETI Institute (Search For Extraterrestrial Intelligence) recently appeared in front of the congressional House Science and Technology Committee for a hearing regarding the search for extraterrestrial intelligence. They told the committee that extraterrestrial life most certainly exists, without question, one of those scientists is Seth Shostak, a well-known senior scientist at the SETI Institute. They said that the chance of discovering life on other planets is inevitable and will most likely occur within the next 20 years.

http://www.collective-evolution.com...xtraterrestrial-life-exists-without-question/


Do you refute that these well trained scientists believe life exists on other planets?

If life exists on other planets then that life may be intelligent and well beyond us in space travel and therefore is evidence that Intelligent design is possible.

What does intelligent design have to do with extraterrestrial life? Aliens existing doesn't mean, or even indicate, that panspermia is true. And even if panspermia IS true, you're still left with the question of where extraterrestrial life came from. At some point, life had to form where there was previously no life.

Evolution does not address how life came to form on the earth from inorganic materials. Intelligent design theory does.

Evolution isn't trying to explain how life forms - it explains how life changes over time. You are talking about abiogensis, which DOES address how life can form from inorganic materials. Intelligent Design isn't a theory - it is, at best, a hypothesis.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

No and the movie is the movie and Dawkin's quotes are not the movie.

Right...

Nothing added changed what I implied. He made it a possibility that life on this planet could be intelligently designed.

Sure he did. But then then explained that this still leaves the question of whether or not life can or did form initially through design or abiogenesis. You do realize that for directed panspermia to occur requires life to already exist, right? And the question then still remains of how THOSE lifeforms started.

Nowhere did I say some evolutionary mechanism was not used in that process and I made it clear ID did not replace evolution.

I never said you did.

You are trying to claim things I never implied for your own agenda.

No I didn't. You are lying again.

 

[Dante Writer]

What does intelligent design have to do with extraterrestrial life? Aliens existing doesn't mean, or even indicate, that panspermia is true. And even if panspermia IS true, you're still left with the question of where extraterrestrial life came from. At some point, life had to form where there was previously no life.


Evolution isn't trying to explain how life forms - it explains how life changes over time. You are talking about abiogensis, which DOES address how life can form from inorganic materials. Intelligent Design isn't a theory - it is, at best, a hypothesis.

1- Panspermia is only one theory of Intelligent Design and not mentioned as a theory I was promoting in my OP

2- The intelligent design Dawkin's described involved an advanced alien race.

3- I am not talking about abiogenesis and if you do not know the difference in that and ID just say so.

4- Intelligent Design is a theory and scientific opinion that life exists on other planets is evidence.

Your opinion is only evidence of a stubbornness to not evolve in your thinking.

 

[Desert Snake]

Could you just answer my questions rather than insulting or patronizing me?

I'm not patronizing you. I did answer your question, earlier in the thread, but you have to know the subject, to grasp that.

How, exactly? What am I presuming?

I didn't say you are presuming anything. You clearly aren't. I said, you should be presuming something, as per logical inference.
The fact that you aren't presuming anything/aren't presenting an argument, is problematic, in this context.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I'm not patronizing you. I did answer your question, earlier in the thread, but you have to know the subject, to grasp that.

You say that you are not patronizing me, then you patronize me again. Great.

If you have already presented the evidence, then have the good grace to simply point me in the evidence's direction. You don't have to be rude.

I didn't say you are presuming anything.

You said that if I'm not a creationist, then I "should" presume something as a matter of "logical inference". Here:

"Anyways, you may not be ''presuming'' any such thing /that's your prerogative/, however, if you are not a Creationist, then you 'should' be, as a logical inference."

I am not a creationist. So what am I presuming?

 

[Dante Writer]

Right...


Sure he did. But then then explained that this still leaves the question of whether or not life can or did form initially through design or abiogenesis. You do realize that for directed panspermia to occur requires life to already exist, right? And the question then still remains of how THOSE lifeforms started.


I never said you did.


No I didn't. You are lying again.

"You do realize that for directed panspermia to occur requires life to already exist, right?"

1- no mention of panspermia was made in my post or by Dawkin's

2- we clone organisms and genetically modify organisms all the time. Not a natural process. Do you consider those evolution?

3- You are assuming that because your theory of evolution is correct it applies universally.

4- the question is and has never been if evolution is possible or if it was used in intelligent design.

Does not matter one bit where those life forms started.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

"You do realize that for directed panspermia to occur requires life to already exist, right?"

1- no mention of panspermia was made in my post or by Dawkin's

The idea of life forming on other planets and then being seeded here is called "panspermia" or, more precisely, "directed panspermia".

2- we clone organisms and genetically modify organisms all the time. Not a natural process. Do you consider those evolution?

I have explained this previously. Evolution only occurs at a population level, so cloning isn't evolution unless said cloning leads to widespread mutations within living populations. To illustrate, again:

A single clone or modified organism forming = a single mutation, not evolution

A population of organisms changing over generations due to the influence of cloned or modified organisms = evolution

3- You are assuming that because your theory of evolution is correct it applies universally.

No I'm not. I've said no such thing, nor anything to imply it.

4- the question is and has never been if evolution is possible or if it was used in intelligent design.

I never addressed such a question.

Does not matter one bit where those life forms started.

Yes it does, since saying "life formed on this planet because aliens seeded it" doesn't answer the question of where life in the Universe itself started and whether or not it is possible for life to form naturally or through intelligent agency of any kind. If alien life seeded life on earth, that life still requires an origin, so the question of abiogenesis vs. intelligent design is still pertinent.

 

[Dante Writer]

The idea of life forming on other planets and then being seeded here is called "panspermia" or, more precisely, "directed panspermia".


I have explained this previously. Evolution only occurs at a population level, so cloning isn't evolution unless said cloning leads to widespread mutations within living populations. To illustrate, again:

A single clone or modified organism forming = a single mutation, not evolution

A population of organisms changing over generations due to the influence of cloned or modified organisms = evolution


No I'm not. I've said no such thing, nor anything to imply it.


I never addressed such a question.


Yes it does, since saying "life formed on this planet because aliens seeded it" doesn't answer the question of where life in the Universe itself started and whether or not it is possible for life to form naturally or through intelligent agency of any kind. If alien life seeded life on earth, that life still requires an origin, so the question of abiogenesis vs. intelligent design is still pertinent.

1- For a non scientists you seem to think your opinion of what things should be called has some weight- it doesn't!

"unless said cloning leads to widespread mutations"

2- Yes and that is called intelligent genetic modification. That explains how intelligent design could have started life on this or other planets. Not natural selection but front loaded evolution. Natural selection would play only a minor role within a species.

"life formed on this planet because aliens seeded it"

3- Again, where did I make this quote? You made a huge stink about taking quotes out of context and editing them and here you are implying something as a quote I never said. Stop being a hypocrite and do not claim quotes I said that are not mine.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

1- For a non scientists you seem to think your opinion of what things should be called has some weight- it doesn't!

And what is your doctorate in?

2- Yes and that is called intelligent genetic modification. That explains how intelligent design could have started life on this or other planets. Not natural selection but front loaded evolution. Natural selection would play only a minor role within a species.

Sure it could. Now where's the evidence?

3- Again, where did I make this quote? You made a huge stink about taking quotes out of context and editing them and here you are implying something as a quote I never said. Stop being a hypocrite and do not claim quotes I said that are not mine. Hypocrite.

I never said that's something you said. Please read my posts more carefully in future before throwing accusations around.

 

[Dante Writer]

And what is your doctorate in?


Sure it could. Now where's the evidence?


I never said that's something you said. Please read my posts more carefully in future before throwing accusations around.

1- M.Ed. professional educator and have taught just about every subject at one time in my career.

2- the evidence is that we already do it on this earth and scientists believe life on other planets exist and could be intelligent. More research will provide more evidence.

3- You deliberately placed quotes to imply that was something I said. It is completely dishonest and do not do it again.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

1- M.Ed. professional educator and have taught just about every subject at one time in my career.

And the subject of your degree was...?

2- the evidence is that we already do it on this earth and scientists believe life on other planets exist and could be intelligent. More research will provide more evidence.

That's not evidence. "We can influence mutations intelligently" does not mean "all mutations are influenced intelligently", and the existence of alien life doesn't add to that assumption either.

Do you or do you not agree with this statement:

At some point life didn't exist in the Universe, and, at a later point, life did exist.

3- You deliberately placed quotes to imply that was something I said. It is completely dishonest and do not do it again.

No I didn't. I put quotation marks on it to imply it is a statement distinct and isolated from the explanation. I was not being dishonest, and you know it.

 

[Dante Writer]

And the subject of your degree was...?


That's not evidence. "We can influence mutations intelligently" does not mean "all mutations are influenced intelligently", and the existence of alien life doesn't add to that assumption either.

Do you or do you not agree with this statement:

At some point life didn't exist in the Universe, and, at a later point, life did exist.


No I didn't. I put quotation marks on it to imply it is a statement distinct and isolated from the explanation. I was not being dishonest, and you know it.

1- Secondary Education. Minor in Health Education.

""all mutations are influenced intelligently"

2- Here again you put quotations marks on something only you said. It does not matter one bit if all mutations are influenced genetically and not all evoltion is a result of natural selection.

3- Does not matter what your opinion is of when life begins in the universe as evolution does not address that. ID is not replacing some evolutionary mechanism and you need to get that into your head.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

1- Secondary Education. Minor in Health Education.

So, no science?

2- Here again you put quotations marks on something only you said. It does not matter one bit if all mutations are influenced genetically and not all evoltion is a result of natural selection.

It does if you're going to posit that intelligently influenced mutations are evidence that life on earth is the result of such a process. It doesn't work like that.

3- Does not matter what your opinion is of when life begins in the universe as evolution does not address that. ID is not replacing some evolutionary mechanism and you need to get that into your head.

I never said it was, and I never gave my opinion on when life began in the Universe or suggest that evolution addressed that. I've asked a simple question, do you or do you not agree with this statement:

At some point life didn't exist in the Universe, and, at a later point, life did exist.

If you agree with the above statement, then whether or not life on earth is a result of panspermia becomes irrelevant to the question of abiogenesis vs. creationism.

 

[Dante Writer]

So, no science?


It does if you're going to posit that intelligently influenced mutations are evidence that life on earth is the result of such a process. It doesn't work like that.


I never said it was, and I never gave my opinion on when life began in the Universe or suggest that evolution addressed that. I've asked a simple question, do you or do you not agree with this statement:

At some point life didn't exist in the Universe, and, at a later point, life did exist.

If you agree with the above statement, then whether or not life on earth is a result of panspermia becomes irrelevant to the question of abiogenesis vs. creationism.

1- Health Ed. Specialist includes biology and anatomy. You know- the same subjects doctors take. And you?

2- I posited nothing and if your imagine went wild do not blame me.

3- If you want to start your own post to ask your question by all means do that instead of trying to hijack my discussions.

This line of debate is now over- you have nothing of substance to add and you should start your own discussion for your topic.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

1- Health Ed. Specialist includes biology and anatomy. You know- the same subjects doctors take. And you?

And yet you don't understand the definition of evolution? I doubt you have studied biology in any serious capacity.

As for me, I don't have any science degree. But apparently that's not an impediment for you, so why should it impede me?

2- I posited nothing and if your imagine went wild do not blame me.

You said the following:

"the evidence is that we already do it on this earth and scientists believe life on other planets exist and could be intelligent. More research will provide more evidence."

So, yes you did. No imagination required.

3- If you want to start your own post to ask your question by all means do that instead of trying to hijack my discussions.

Again, this is a debate forum. You do realize how forums work, right?

This line of debate is now over- you have nothing of substance to add and you should start your own discussion for your topic.

I'd rather correct your in your topics, since you insist on making false claims and disparaging me.

 

[Dante Writer]

And yet you don't understand the definition of evolution? I doubt you have studied biology in any serious capacity.

As for me, I don't have any science degree. But apparently that's not an impediment for you, so why should it impede me?


You said the following:

"the evidence is that we already do it on this earth and scientists believe life on other planets exist and could be intelligent. More research will provide more evidence."

So, yes you did. No imagination required.


Again, this is a debate forum. You do realize how forums work, right?


I'd rather correct your in your topics, since you insist on making false claims and disparaging me.

This line of debate is now finished- go start your own discussion instead of trolling mine.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

This line of debate is now finished- go start your own discussion instead of trolling mine.

If running rather than debating is the best you can do, then it's probably in your best interest.

 

[Dante Writer]

If running rather than debating is the best you can do, then it's probably in your best interest.

This line of debate is now finished- go start your own discussion instead of trolling mine.