Intelligent Design seems somewhat overstated...

[lewisnotmiller]

I mean to say, even if I think someone was guiding evolution, I'm going with 'Not completely random' or 'somewhat guided'.

'Intelligent Design' seems to completely fly in the face of the available evidence.

 

[Cooky]

I mean to say, even if I think someone was guiding evolution, I'm going with 'Not completely random' or 'somewhat guided'.

'Intelligent Design' seems to completely fly in the face of the available evidence.

What if life is a great "play". The most realistic play there ever was.

...And when the show is over, it's all high fives and smiles.

 

[Remté]

How?

 

[Subduction Zone]

How?

Why not start with the fact that their is no scientific evidence for intelligent design.

 

[Remté]

Why not start with the fact that their is no scientific evidence for intelligent design.

What comes next?

 

[Subduction Zone]

What comes next?

Hopefully real science.

 

[wellwisher]

I mean to say, even if I think someone was guiding evolution, I'm going with 'Not completely random' or 'somewhat guided'.

'Intelligent Design' seems to completely fly in the face of the available evidence.

I look at intelligent design, as implying that the universe was constructed in a logical way that can be extrapolated with logic. An intelligent engineer or applied scientist builds a bridge in this way. Theoretical science may not always be this way. But practical science has to confront hard reality.

A random universe is not a very intelligent design. This approach does not require much thinking, planning or extrapolating. A random approach only requires using a statistical oracle to tell you your fortune. The black box approach of statistics means living in the dark! An intelligent design can open the black box.

The ancients used a whims of the gods approach, which was a random model, using their own version of an oracle. It was not a math oracle but served the same purpose. This approach did not require intelligence, other than faith in their oracle. Could you do statistics if you doubted or lacked faith in this oracle? Intelligent design is not as limited.

The Age of Reason, which ushered in modern science, was based on assuming there were logical explanations for all things. This superseded the whims of the god approach of oracles and randomness. For some reason much of science went backwards to the preAge of Reason, when oracles ruled.This explains why the Golden age of science is in the past. Einstein used an ID approach.

If you look at the whims of the gods, it means anything has odds, since gods have all type of power, but whims mean they lack focus and direction. Therefore there cans be no good logical explanation. The gods in charge of these whims, were half brain dead, since they could not seem to structure things in a consistent way. This type of God would have been an idiot savant, who eventually gets things done, but there is no rhyme of reason when it does occur. All we can do is consult the oracle, for when it may occur.

Maybe science can explain the physical basis for randomness to make sure, it is not a faith based religion?

Intelligent design assumes a God who has mental clarity, instead of a being an airhead. He has a plan, that he executes, that builds upon itself, in a predictable fashion. This is a sign of intelligent life. ID, to me, is a projection for humanity. It is connected to how we approach reality; rational or random?

If you look at our universe, we live in a quantum universe. A quantum universe has distinct states and gaps between these distinct states. The random assumption, of finite odds for all things, is not even realistic in a quantum universe. Not all things have odds in a quantum universe; gaps.

A quantum universe is consistent with an intelligent design; age of reason. If you build an automobile, only certain parts will work, in terms of each application. We do not use a random approach based on all possible alternators, until we find the correct one. But rather we eliminate most alternators, in advance; gaps, and allow the best one to be installed.

The atheist try to confused the nuts and bolts of each science approach, by attributing ID to a God and religion, so they can dismiss this based on philosophy instead of science. However, they never explain the basis for random; their faith in an idiot savant god. If we put aside the politics and look at each approach, ID is more advanced and consistent with a quantum universe, where odds are superseded, to sure things, based on free energy.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

A random universe is not a very intelligent design. This approach does not require much thinking, planning or extrapolating. A random approach only requires using a statistical oracle to tell you your fortune. The black box approach of statistics means living in the dark! An intelligent design can open the black box.

You're creating a false dichotomy. If we reject (or merely do not accept) intelligence as the cause of the Universe, we don't necessarily have to believe it was, instead, "random". We may discover that the Universe is an inevitable or likely result of physical forces interacting in a space governed by physical laws. That is not "random".

The ancients used a whims of the gods approach, which was a random model, using their own version of an oracle. It was not a math oracle but served the same purpose. This approach did not require intelligence, other than faith in their oracle. Could you do statistics if you doubted or lacked faith in this oracle? Intelligent design is not as limited.

Intelligent design isn't limited at all, because it makes absolutely no predictions or assertions that can be tested or falsified. Not a single discovery has ever been made in the field of "intelligent design".

Intelligent design assumes a God who has mental clarity, instead of a being an airhead. He has a plan, that he executes, that builds upon itself, in a predictable fashion. This is a sign of intelligent life. ID, to me, is a projection for humanity. It is connected to how we approach reality; rational or random?

Again, presenting a false dichotomy. There is not a single test you can present to us that can be used to determine design from non-design.

A quantum universe is consistent with an intelligent design; age of reason. If you build an automobile, only certain parts will work, in terms of each application. We do not use a random approach based on all possible alternators, until we find the correct one. But rather we eliminate most alternators, in advance; gaps, and allow the best one to be installed.

This is mere equivocation. Things that arise in nature cannot be meaningfully compared with things we identify as designed, unless you can produce a clear-cut test for design independent of observing the creative process.

The atheist try to confused the nuts and bolts of each science approach, by attributing ID to a God and religion, so they can dismiss this based on philosophy instead of science. However, they never explain the basis for random; their faith in an idiot savant god. If we put aside the politics and look at each approach, ID is more advanced and consistent with a quantum universe, where odds are superseded, to sure things, based on free energy.

This is just meaningless waffle and yet more false dichotomies.

 

[osgart]

How would anyone test for intelligence inherent in nature?

What would evidence look like?

No one would ever be satisfied coming from either side with the others conclusions.

I am glad scientists can branch off into their own camps and differ on the issue of intelligence in nature. Both sides are unable to see the plausibility of the other side.

There is no point marrying anybody to either side, when all they want is divorce.

Both sides are totally alien too each other on the matter.

 

[viole]

How?

Maybe because it is stupid, instead.

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

I look at intelligent design, as implying that the universe was constructed in a logical way that can be extrapolated with logic. An intelligent engineer or applied scientist builds a bridge in this way. Theoretical science may not always be this way. But practical science has to confront hard reality.

A random universe is not a very intelligent design. This approach does not require much thinking, planning or extrapolating. A random approach only requires using a statistical oracle to tell you your fortune. The black box approach of statistics means living in the dark! An intelligent design can open the black box.

The ancients used a whims of the gods approach, which was a random model, using their own version of an oracle. It was not a math oracle but served the same purpose. This approach did not require intelligence, other than faith in their oracle. Could you do statistics if you doubted or lacked faith in this oracle? Intelligent design is not as limited.

The Age of Reason, which ushered in modern science, was based on assuming there were logical explanations for all things. This superseded the whims of the god approach of oracles and randomness. For some reason much of science went backwards to the preAge of Reason, when oracles ruled.This explains why the Golden age of science is in the past. Einstein used an ID approach.

If you look at the whims of the gods, it means anything has odds, since gods have all type of power, but whims mean they lack focus and direction. Therefore there cans be no good logical explanation. The gods in charge of these whims, were half brain dead, since they could not seem to structure things in a consistent way. This type of God would have been an idiot savant, who eventually gets things done, but there is no rhyme of reason when it does occur. All we can do is consult the oracle, for when it may occur.

Maybe science can explain the physical basis for randomness to make sure, it is not a faith based religion?

Intelligent design assumes a God who has mental clarity, instead of a being an airhead. He has a plan, that he executes, that builds upon itself, in a predictable fashion. This is a sign of intelligent life. ID, to me, is a projection for humanity. It is connected to how we approach reality; rational or random?

If you look at our universe, we live in a quantum universe. A quantum universe has distinct states and gaps between these distinct states. The random assumption, of finite odds for all things, is not even realistic in a quantum universe. Not all things have odds in a quantum universe; gaps.

A quantum universe is consistent with an intelligent design; age of reason. If you build an automobile, only certain parts will work, in terms of each application. We do not use a random approach based on all possible alternators, until we find the correct one. But rather we eliminate most alternators, in advance; gaps, and allow the best one to be installed.

The atheist try to confused the nuts and bolts of each science approach, by attributing ID to a God and religion, so they can dismiss this based on philosophy instead of science. However, they never explain the basis for random; their faith in an idiot savant god. If we put aside the politics and look at each approach, ID is more advanced and consistent with a quantum universe, where odds are superseded, to sure things, based on free energy.

A quentum universe is random at fundamental level. What we experience are average values of things changing randomly all the time.

So, not a lot of space for ID, SD, or any orher D.

Ciao

- viole

 

[George-ananda]

I mean to say, even if I think someone was guiding evolution, I'm going with 'Not completely random' or 'somewhat guided'.

'Intelligent Design' seems to completely fly in the face of the available evidence.

(my position is that the most reasonable theory is that evolution was fostered by a the realm of nature spirits (for lack of a perfect term)).

So perhaps we kind of agree, but I have often argued in the past how the term 'Intelligent Design' is not even a clear term. My theory can be called 'intelligent design' too if we take the words literally.

 

[sun rise]

Intelligent design isn't limited at all, because it makes absolutely no predictions or assertions that can be tested or falsified. Not a single discovery has ever been made in the field of "intelligent design".

True. At it's base, ID is non-scientific - it can't be falsified. So it can't be proven or disproven. "God is Who. Evolution is how" is theology not science.

 

[Nakosis]

I mean to say, even if I think someone was guiding evolution, I'm going with 'Not completely random' or 'somewhat guided'.

'Intelligent Design' seems to completely fly in the face of the available evidence.

Being that Intelligent Design implies a designer, I say produce the designer. Then you got my vote.

Until then, folks can speculate on it whichever direction they choose to. Don't see it being worth much but people are certainly free to do so.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

What if life is a great "play". The most realistic play there ever was.

...And when the show is over, it's all high fives and smiles.

God as a Playwright? I like it!

 

[lewisnotmiller]

How?

Design flaws abound. Perhaps were a rough drafting...or God outsourced some of the work to subcontractors, so as to keep costs down.

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

I mean to say, even if I think someone was guiding evolution, I'm going with 'Not completely random' or 'somewhat guided'.

'Intelligent Design' seems to completely fly in the face of the available evidence.

Intelligent design created everything. Which includes everything we DO NOT know (which is vastly more than we do know).
Intelligent design created everything for a purpose, with, perhaps, a planned randomness? So not really random at all maybe?
For instance, life itself, pretty much follows the same patterns in all living things. In any particular species, there is something, designed?, that causes life to start, grow, mature, propagate more life, then die. That’s why the planet is full of living things. Some species have been around millions of years, virtually unchanged, and continue to propagate. Many species have died off through extinction. Many new species have sprung up along the way.
Many evolve and change dramatically. Many do not. We cannot say, all of this is not part of a grand design or not, so we will not argue about it.

Now let’s take humanity. What’s with this species that seems to have appeared on earth very recently? Where did the first people come from? They probably didn’t just appear out of nowhere one day. That’s not what the scientific evidence would indicate. Scientific evidence doesn’t tell us that various species just spontaneously appeared. But we don’t really know for sure, do we? Evolution seems to make perfect sense, to me anyway. But can I be 100% sure? Not really. So nothing to argue about here either.
But what do we know about this strange new species called humans? They have different attributes than any other life form on earth. They are the only species that can love, and the only species that can reason. Some other animals may appear to love and reason, but rational thought brings us to the conclusion that they are acting upon some preprogrammed instinct. Only humans can love, and at the same time, only humans can hate.
How is it that out of untold millions and millions of species, only humans are different? It can’t be random.

imo

 

[ChristineM]

I look at intelligent design, as implying that the universe was constructed in a logical way that can be extrapolated with logic. An intelligent engineer or applied scientist builds a bridge in this way. Theoretical science may not always be this way. But practical science has to confront hard reality.;

A random universe is not a very intelligent design. This approach does not require much thinking, planning or extrapolating. A random approach only requires using a statistical oracle to tell you your fortune. The black box approach of statistics means living in the dark! An intelligent design can open the black box.

The ancients used a whims of the gods approach, which was a random model, using their own version of an oracle. It was not a math oracle but served the same purpose. This approach did not require intelligence, other than faith in their oracle. Could you do statistics if you doubted or lacked faith in this oracle? Intelligent design is not as limited.

The Age of Reason, which ushered in modern science, was based on assuming there were logical explanations for all things. This superseded the whims of the god approach of oracles and randomness. For some reason much of science went backwards to the preAge of Reason, when oracles ruled.This explains why the Golden age of science is in the past. Einstein used an ID approach.

If you look at the whims of the gods, it means anything has odds, since gods have all type of power, but whims mean they lack focus and direction. Therefore there cans be no good logical explanation. The gods in charge of these whims, were half brain dead, since they could not seem to structure things in a consistent way. This type of God would have been an idiot savant, who eventually gets things done, but there is no rhyme of reason when it does occur. All we can do is consult the oracle, for when it may occur.

Maybe science can explain the physical basis for randomness to make sure, it is not a faith based religion?

Intelligent design assumes a God who has mental clarity, instead of a being an airhead. He has a plan, that he executes, that builds upon itself, in a predictable fashion. This is a sign of intelligent life. ID, to me, is a projection for humanity. It is connected to how we approach reality; rational or random?

If you look at our universe, we live in a quantum universe. A quantum universe has distinct states and gaps between these distinct states. The random assumption, of finite odds for all things, is not even realistic in a quantum universe. Not all things have odds in a quantum universe; gaps.

A quantum universe is consistent with an intelligent design; age of reason. If you build an automobile, only certain parts will work, in terms of each application. We do not use a random approach based on all possible alternators, until we find the correct one. But rather we eliminate most alternators, in advance; gaps, and allow the best one to be installed.

The atheist try to confused the nuts and bolts of each science approach, by attributing ID to a God and religion, so they can dismiss this based on philosophy instead of science. However, they never explain the basis for random; their faith in an idiot savant god. If we put aside the politics and look at each approach, ID is more advanced and consistent with a quantum universe, where odds are superseded, to sure things, based on free energy.

The logical and ordered universe

 

[ChristineM]

Intelligent design created everything. Which includes everything we DO NOT know (which is vastly more than we do know).
Intelligent design created everything for a purpose, with, perhaps, a planned randomness? So not really random at all maybe?
For instance, life itself, pretty much follows the same patterns in all living things. In any particular species, there is something, designed?, that causes life to start, grow, mature, propagate more life, then die. That’s why the planet is full of living things. Some species have been around millions of years, virtually unchanged, and continue to propagate. Many species have died off through extinction. Many new species have sprung up along the way.
Many evolve and change dramatically. Many do not. We cannot say, all of this is not part of a grand design or not, so we will not argue about it.

Now let’s take humanity. What’s with this species that seems to have appeared on earth very recently? Where did the first people come from? They probably didn’t just appear out of nowhere one day. That’s not what the scientific evidence would indicate. Scientific evidence doesn’t tell us that various species just spontaneously appeared. But we don’t really know for sure, do we? Evolution seems to make perfect sense, to me anyway. But can I be 100% sure? Not really. So nothing to argue about here either.
But what do we know about this strange new species called humans? They have different attributes than any other life form on earth. They are the only species that can love, and the only species that can reason. Some other animals may appear to love and reason, but rational thought brings us to the conclusion that they are acting upon some preprogrammed instinct. Only humans can love, and at the same time, only humans can hate.
How is it that out of untold millions and millions of species, only humans are different? It can’t be random.

imo

Entropy predicts life.

All species are different

 

[Subduction Zone]

Intelligent design created everything. Which includes everything we DO NOT know (which is vastly more than we do know).
Intelligent design created everything for a purpose, with, perhaps, a planned randomness? So not really random at all maybe?
For instance, life itself, pretty much follows the same patterns in all living things. In any particular species, there is something, designed?, that causes life to start, grow, mature, propagate more life, then die. That’s why the planet is full of living things. Some species have been around millions of years, virtually unchanged, and continue to propagate. Many species have died off through extinction. Many new species have sprung up along the way.
Many evolve and change dramatically. Many do not. We cannot say, all of this is not part of a grand design or not, so we will not argue about it.

Now let’s take humanity. What’s with this species that seems to have appeared on earth very recently? Where did the first people come from? They probably didn’t just appear out of nowhere one day. That’s not what the scientific evidence would indicate. Scientific evidence doesn’t tell us that various species just spontaneously appeared. But we don’t really know for sure, do we? Evolution seems to make perfect sense, to me anyway. But can I be 100% sure? Not really. So nothing to argue about here either.
But what do we know about this strange new species called humans? They have different attributes than any other life form on earth. They are the only species that can love, and the only species that can reason. Some other animals may appear to love and reason, but rational thought brings us to the conclusion that they are acting upon some preprogrammed instinct. Only humans can love, and at the same time, only humans can hate.
How is it that out of untold millions and millions of species, only humans are different? It can’t be random.

imo

How would you test that belief? If you cannot think of a test that would falsify this belief then a belief is all that you have. Scientific ideas are testable. They need to be able to be shown to be wrong if they are wrong. Ad hoc explanations do not explain anything.