Harsh Truth: If Intelligent Design is Untestable . . .

[dust1n]

Agreeing is fine, it's the academic part where problems start- most of us always agreed on e.g. a creation event v static/steady state universes, unpredictable underlying forces v classical physics. Academics were forbidden from such heresy. blind faith is faith which does not recognize itself

I'm not sure I am understand what you mean.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

100 does not mean 100%

Also you're opinion of them is that they are a disgrace, but they have obviously been more productive in life then a certain someone I'm talking to.
Why don't you prove it then? Why don't you become a 'real' scientists and use scientific evidence to prove them wrong?
It's not hard right? Since they are obviously so corrupt and they all lie and use false emotions to sway people.
You should be able to do it easily, right?

Do it.
Get your nose out of your book and actually do something about it since you have this huge issue with it.

All I see is some guy whining about something they can't even prove is true.
Again, pathetic.

Again just manipulation. You have no emotional depth, your judgements are vapid. It is requesting to sell my soul. The soul is who I am as being the owner of my decisions. Creationism accomodates subjectivity very well indeed. As well as objectivity. This is why creation scientists are also good people, and not like you.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Evolutionists don't do subjectivity. They use emotive words for manipulation, not to express what they feel. They manipulate with emotive words to try and get people with the evolution program.

The root of subjectivity is the agency of a decision.Subjectivity is essentially a creationist idea. Evolutionists make a conscious effort to surpress and destroy their emotions, because they believe emotions get in the way of objectivity, facts.

Uh oh, you got us! Us evolutionists are actually robots masquerading as humans. Like in the Terminator movies.

To my fellow evolutionists ... Alert the others, he's onto us!

 

[dust1n]

If you can make people believe that all life is without design, purpose, including themselves, you create a void to provide that purpose, at least that's how atheists Stalin, Mao, Il Sung rationalized it.

I wonder how Ismail Enver Pasha, King Leopold II, Idi Amin, and President McKinley thought about it.

 

[gnostic]

Cursing in not part of my language. To you maybe it's natural or your probably can't finish a sentence without using them words.

If I "curse", then I've cursed.

Don't blame other people if I curse.

It's my Australian side that make me curse, and that often out of sheer frustration. And that because I am too old to change my way, despite the introduction of political correctness.

And I not afraid of losing debates or arguments. That's not why I cursed. I cursed because you have repeatedly twisted my words.

And you have twisted words, way back before we began arguing over genealogy (I am referring to the dinosaur-behemoth). That you falsely accusing me of bragging about royal background, which I never claim I have, is misleading and desperate ploys to bait me, even after I have trying correcting you, and the cursing you have quoted from me, just showed the limited of my frustration and patience.

You want to win argument, then win them without twisting what people say or write. You are getting bad reputation for misrepresenting what other say. And it is just with me; you have done with just about everyone else here you who have opposite views to yours.

You don't see it, do you? You really don't see it that you have twisted other people posts?

 

[gnostic]

Not just evolutionists, how about cosmologists, climastrologists, social 'scientists', economic 'scientists', I'd say it is institutionalizing science, leading by academic consensus, that is inherently the antithesis of the method. More and more free thinking people are beginning to realize this.

There are nothing wrong with agreeing or disagreeing with academics, guy.

You just have to back up your arguments or views with evidences or facts.

So far I have seen creationist's against evolution, with not looking at the evidences supplied by those that supported evolutionary biology, but at the same time presenting their own evidences that support creationism. Ignoring evidences seemed be a common trait of creationists.

At other times, I have seen creationists used faulty or outdated information about evolution to prove their points. That's when they make blatant misleading claims. For example, they often confused abiogenesis with evolution, and they present arguments against evolution that should have been for abiogenesis.

Evolution is about changes - biologically - it's not about origin of first life. For evolution/change/adaptation to occur, there have to be generations of life before it and generations after it.

No creationists have presented any verifiable evidences.

A practical side to evolution, occurred with researches in medicine and diseases, especially with viruses and bacteria. Every time medical researchers find away to battle diseases or viruses, viruses have way of adapting, so that it become immune to be he latest medicine or vaccines. That's all come understanding evolution.

So for any creationists saying that there are no evidences to support evolution, don't understand what science and scientific method (hence, ignorance), or they are lying to themselves, when they ignored presented and observable evidences.

 

[Deathbydefault]

That one stays on the ignore list.


No matter how patient you are you will never get 1 + 1 to equal 2 with this person.

Perhaps not, but stupidity is something I find entertaining sometimes.
It's just like arguing with JayJay,
he hears only what he wants to hear, and knows only what he's heard.

It's fun to pick at all the cracks in their arguments and watch them get angry, it's what I'm promoting right now.
I will continue to do so until he either ignores me or gives up.

lol, this is a fun way to waste a day.

 

[gnostic]

If you can make people believe that all life is without design, purpose, including themselves, you create a void to provide that purpose, at least that's how atheists Stalin, Mao, Il Sung rationalized it.

Sorry, but none of these people are scientists, so how does that support your argument against science.

And btw, a large population of biologists have religious backgrounds. Percentage-wise, there seemed be a lot of atheists in the branch of biology, but actual number of atheists are actually small, and they are minority compared to the number of Christians that do support evolution.

So you are exaggerating if you think evolutionary biologists are all atheists.

Perhaps, the number of atheists seemed big, because the stats count agnostics as "atheists".

 

[gnostic]

Perhaps not, but stupidity is something I find entertaining sometimes.
It's just like arguing with JayJay,
he hears only what he wants to hear, and knows only what he's heard.

It's fun to pick at all the cracks in their arguments and watch them get angry, it's what I'm promoting right now.
I will continue to do so until he either ignores me or gives up.

lol, this is a fun way to waste a day.

He is actually a "she".

 

[outhouse]

If you can make people believe that all life is without design,

Where is there any evidence AT ALL that there is design??????????????????????????????

There is no evidence for such outside mythology is there?

purpose,

Unsubstantiated rhetoric

.

you create a void

IN imagination?

at least that's how atheists Stalin, Mao, Il Sung rationalized it.

More baseless Unsubstantiated rhetoric

 

[Deathbydefault]

He is actually a "she".

Eh, I was saying Mohammad was like her.
So when I said "he" I was referring to Mohammad.

My bad, should have stated that more clearly, lol.

 

[Bunyip]

Evolution is NOT testable. Adaptation is testable....they are NOT the same.

Why keep repeating the same blunt lie? Of course evolution is testable, but the topic here is ID.

Been told by whom? People who have swallowed the evolution fraud hook, line and sinker? Who lies? Those who claim that organic evolution is an established fact. It never has been and never will be.

You have no doubt been "told" that God created all life on earth just the way it states in Genesis by those who believe in the Bible...does it cut any mustard with you? The claims of scientists cut no mustard with me.



Adaptation can be observed right now...adaptation is NOT the same as organic evolution by a long shot. That is the point of the denial. There is no proof.....you know there's no proof or it would have been produced by now. Everything offered so far is based on supposition, not fact.



In other people's definition of ID?.....I don't really care. I subscribe to what the Bible teaches, not what men teach.
The complex and intricate biological systems that operate in every part of the earth and in all living things is not the product of blind chance mutations. An intelligent designer is responsible for all the life forms we observe, including the microscopic ones.

 

[McBell]

You have not debated in this thread at all. All you've been doing was heckling and nothing else. Is cursing your natural language?

So now you are going to continue using the very behaviour you are whining about others using with everyone?

Rather difficult to take your whining seriously when you yourself are just as guilty of those you accuse.

 

[McBell]

Cursing in not part of my language. To you maybe it's natural or your probably can't finish a sentence without using them words.

stop lashing out at everyone and at the very least pretend to the better person you claim to be.

 

[McBell]

Why keep repeating the same blunt lie? Of course evolution is testable, but the topic here is ID.

It is rather comical how the only thing creationist can do to support creationism/ID is attack all their strawmen.

 

[Bunyip]

It is rather comical how the only thing creationist can do to support creationism/ID is attack all their strawmen.

Were I a JW, I would wan't JJDee gagged.

 

[gnostic]

Eh, I was saying Mohammad was like her.
So when I said "he" I was referring to Mohammad.

My bad, should have stated that more clearly, lol.

Oh, that would explain it. I can't see or read any posts by Mohammad because he is the ONLY person in my "ignore list".

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

I have been diagnosed with alexithymia, so I do have emotion issues.
However, I am but a child that has taught myself everything I believe.
I don't trust what I can't see, and I can see the evidence in science.
You deny such evidence, and claim you actually know something.

You're either stupid, a troll, or a bigot.

Or all of the above.
That option is defiantly on the table.

I have been diagnosed with alexithymia, so I do have emotion issues.
However, I am but a child that has taught myself everything I believe.
I don't trust what I can't see, and I can see the evidence in science.
You deny such evidence, and claim you actually know something.

You know nothing (John Snow). So until you do I don't need to hear 'they don't have this or this or this and they think this way because they have no souls'.
Absolutely idiotic in every sense and meaning of the word.

I make my own decisions too.
I Decided to learn the sciences because my mother Decided to force her religion down my throat.
I Decided to believe what I could see, what made logical sense.
You Decided to let your fairy tales get into your head.
You Decided to let go of actual logic.

People who do such things have no weight in their words, as far as I can see.
It's just empty blathering of the gullible and willfully ignorant.

Like I said, Get out of my internet face.

Until you have something to say that someone can actually learn from,

Peace.

That's about an accurate description of evolution theory as being a mental condition, rather than a scientific theory. You want to learn then learn creationism.

creator
chooses
opinion
spiritual domain

creation
chosen
fact
material domain

 

[Deathbydefault]

That's about an accurate description of evolution theory as being a mental condition, rather than a scientific theory. You want to learn then learn creationism.

creator
chooses
opinion
spiritual domain

creation
chosen
fact
material domain

Wow, as soon as I saw your reply "blah blah blah" sounded off in my head.
Turns out my head predicted the future.
That's all you are, "blah blah blah".

I have learned creationism, sadly.
Raised in a fundamentalist family, in a highly Christian area.
For every single thousandth of a second I've spent in this place I've gotten a little dumber.
Getting religion forced on me via mother to this day.

Also, how was the comparison between me and something that is completely objective viable in anyway? I'm not a theory....
Looks like you're suffering the same loss of brain cells as I am,
just so happens you started off with quite a lot less.

Another thing: you're idiotic arguments can be used by anyone at anytime.
I can easily say, "creationism? what a joke. You want to learn, then learn science." and it's equally credible.

Find something better to say, you're getting boring.
If you haven't caught on, I'm not taking you seriously at all.
You're just a joke to me, a joke with no punchline at that.

If you had anything interesting or intelligent to say you should probably say it.
Lest I get completely bored of you and just stop replying, maybe you'll say something funny if I do that.
Something like, "see that? He quit! That means I win!!!".
Yeah, that'd make me chuckle, should we go for it?

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Wow, as soon as I saw your reply "blah blah blah" sounded off in my head.
Turns out my head predicted the future.
That's all you are, "blah blah blah".

I have learned creationism, sadly.
Raised in a fundamentalist family, in a highly Christian area.
For every single thousandth of a second I've spent in this place I've gotten a little dumber.
Getting religion forced on me via mother to this day.

Also, how was the comparison between me and something that is completely objective viable in anyway? I'm not a theory....
Looks like you're suffering the same loss of brain cells as I am,
just so happens you started off with quite a lot less.

Another thing: you're idiotic arguments can be used by anyone at anytime.
I can easily say, "creationism? what a joke. You want to learn, then learn science." and it's equally credible.

Find something better to say, you're getting boring.
If you haven't caught on, I'm not taking you seriously at all.
You're just a joke to me, a joke with no punchline at that.

If you had anything interesting or intelligent to say you should probably say it.
Lest I get completely bored of you and just stop replying, maybe you'll say something funny if I do that.
Something like, "see that? He quit! That means I win!!!".
Yeah, that'd make me chuckle, should we go for it?

You don't understand the category of the creator, and you only half understand the creation category.

So then "emotion", to what category does it belong? It belongs to the creator category, because emotion is referred to as what makes a decision turn out the way it does (the motivation of a decision). And because it belongs to the creator category, it means the existence of emotions is a matter of opinion.

The sun, to what category does it belong to? You can see the sun, which means it is a fact that it exists, so it belongs to the material category. All in this category are chosen, meaning the sun is chosen to be the way it is, which means it also could have turned out another way, and the sun can turn out several different ways in the future.

That is how people provide room for subjectivity, expression of emotion, forming an opinion, by having the creator category dedicated to it. While what you do, you only acknowledge the creation category, and this means there is no room provided for expression of emotion, forming an opinion, in your beliefs.

creator
chooses
opinion
spiritual domain

creation
chosen
fact
material domain