Evolution a theory in Crisis

[MiniBoglins]

Maybe, but I've never heard of anything being cited as the intelligence in intelligent design except for God.

perhaps you can show me a website that proposes an alternative for God as the intelligence?

There are alot of alternatives but they are not well known. One is the ancient astronaut theory, another one is Fred Hoyle's (1915–2001) and Chandra Wickramasinghe ideas about intelligent design and panspermia. Others theories have been put forward by metaphysicians that all creations in the universe were designed by and exist in minds.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Actually as far as the law is concerned ID is Creationism... there is no significant difference between the two, they even share leadership, funding and "experts".

This is best demonstrated by the "cdesign proponentsists" faux pas.
"Cdesign Proponentsists" | NCSE

wa:do

Great website!

 

[Revoltingest]

There are alot of alternatives but they are not well known. One is the ancient astronaut theory, another one is Fred Hoyle's (1915–2001) and Chandra Wickramasinghe ideas about intelligent design and panspermia. Others theories have been put forward by metaphysicians that all creations in the universe were designed by and exist in minds.

Such speculation is legitimate. But they're not testable theories so far, hardly putting the TOE "in crisis".

 

[painted wolf]

IDers are often careful not to name a deity, and maintain that an intelligent designer could equally be an advanced alien civilisation that created the Earth and life on it.

Except that they eventually do name their deity when they think no-one is paying attention. usually while they preach to fellow believers.
For example Dembski recently reviled the believes in a literal Bible.. no surprise given DI foots his bill.

Dembski Coming Clean - He's a Creationist YEC - The Panda's Thumb

wa:do

 

[MiniBoglins]

Actually as far as the law is concerned ID is Creationism... there is no significant difference between the two, they even share leadership, funding and "experts".

This is best demonstrated by the "cdesign proponentsists" faux pas.
"Cdesign Proponentsists" | NCSE

wa:do

Creationism and ID are very different. I know atheist ID, as mentioned creationism is always religious based. You are native american, what do you think about native american creationism? Even your own culture has creation stories, which are taken to be litrally true. If you do not know what Native American Creationism is, you should check out the books by a chap called Vine deloria he was an american indian creationist he argued for a young earth. There are many different types of creationism. Have a look for example at my Hindu Creationism thread. The problem with some people is they are lead to believe creationism is a Christian view only. Not the case at all. Creationism is found all round the world in many different cultures.

 

[Revoltingest]

Creationism and ID are very different. I know atheist ID, as mentioned creationism is always religious based. You are native american, what do you think about native american creationism? Even your own culture has creation stories, which are taken to be litrally true. If you do not know what Native American Creationism is, you should check out the books by a chap called Vine deloria he was an american indian creationist he argued for a young earth. There are many different types of creationism. Have a look for example at my Hindu Creationism thread. The problem with some people is they are lead to believe creationism is a Christian view only. Not the case at all. Creationism is found all round the world in many different cultures.

Granted, ID & creationism are quite different as defined. But in the context of American law & public policy, the difference becomes insignificant.
One appears to have evolved from the other solely to skirt legal hurdles to being taught in public school. So most of us non-IDers see them as practically equivalent.

 

[MiniBoglins]

Such speculation is legitimate. But they're not testable theories so far, hardly putting the TOE "in crisis".

Michael dentons book really did wake me up to the problems in evolution you should check it out. It really did explain the crisis in evolution and the problems with it. I enjoyed the book becuase it was open, it was not tied down with any religious fundamentalism it layed the facts straight out on the table. Some Evolutionists have even given the book positive reviews. There are not many books like this out there involved in the creation/evolution field.

 

[The_Evelyonian]

Michael dentons book really did wake me up to the problems in evolution...

Please, lay them out for us and let's see if we can't help to put some of these misconceptions to rest.

 

[Revoltingest]

Michael dentons book really did wake me up to the problems in evolution you should check it out. It really did explain the crisis in evolution and the problems with it. I enjoyed the book becuase it was open, it was not tied down with any religious fundamentalism it layed the facts straight out on the table. Some Evolutionists have even given the book positive reviews. There are not many books like this out there involved in the creation/evolution field.

I'll pass on the book. Honestly, I'm just too lazy & overwhelmed with other books in my queue, so I don't explore fringe works.
I've seen too many claims of revolutionary breakthrus being nothing more than a collection of mistakes. I have a similar prejudice towards:
- Claims of cell phones in 1920s films.
- Cars which burn water.
- Alien technology in military aircraft.
- Astrological predictions.
- Anything Paul Krugman has to say about money.
- Extended warranties on toasters.

 

[YmirGF]

Crisis? What Crisis? Where?

 

[Revoltingest]

Crisis? What Crisis? Where?

Here. Right here! Don't you see it?

 

[Gunfingers]

Please, lay them out for us and let's see if we can't help to put some of these misconceptions to rest.

I just finished reading a review on talkorigins. The whole book is basically just irriducible complexity.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I'll pass on the book. Honestly, I'm just too lazy & overwhelmed with other books in my queue, so I don't explore fringe works.
I've seen too many claims of revolutionary breakthrus being nothing more than a collection of mistakes. I have a similar prejudice towards:
- Claims of cell phones in 1920s films.
- Cars which burn water.
- Alien technology in military aircraft.
- Astrological predictions.
- Anything Paul Krugman has to say about money.
- Extended warranties on toasters.

hmmmm

 

[Tristesse]

Michael dentons book really did wake me up to the problems in evolution you should check it out. It really did explain the crisis in evolution and the problems with it. I enjoyed the book becuase it was open, it was not tied down with any religious fundamentalism it layed the facts straight out on the table. Some Evolutionists have even given the book positive reviews. There are not many books like this out there involved in the creation/evolution field.

Problems such as?

 

[Revoltingest]

hmmmm

I never saw any design work authored by little gray beings when I worked on the F-18.
Just men & women....although, some of the women were short & good looking in an other-worldly way.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Evolution is in about as much crisis as basic addition and subtraction.

 

[Revoltingest]

Evolution is in about as much crisis as basic addition and subtraction.

Division has that zero-in-the-denominator problem, but calculus lets us cope with it.
Crisis averted!

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I never saw any design work authored by little gray beings when I worked on the F-18.
Just men & women....although, some of the women were short.....& good looking in an other-worldly way.

haha - by that time the alien technology could have been replicated by human technologies.

But I don't think that anyone argues that the F-18 uses alien technology, but that we have some aircraft that operate on alien-based engines.

 

[Tristesse]

Miniboglins, would you like to point out the problems with evolution, so, that we can inform you of where the intelligent design proponents went wrong? Every problem they've raised has been refuted.

 

[The_Evelyonian]

I just finished reading a review on talkorigins. The whole book is basically just irriducible complexity.

Ah, that old chestnut. Well, everything that the cdesign proponentsists have ever trotted out as irreducibly complex has been debunked.

If that is the only thing the book has to offer then I think I'll save my time and read something a bit more intelligent, like The Cat in The Hat.