Scientific Evidence Supporting Intelligent Design

[painted wolf]

lol... so who gives out tickets to the birds?
Or the space shuttle for that matter.

What is gravity Sandor...

you realize the "law of gravity" is just a description of the effect that mass has on other objects... (and possibly time).
Physics just is...

wa:do

 

[fantome profane]

Mere descriptions? Throw yourself out of an airplane without a parachute and experience first hand the consequence of the law of gravity.

Exactly, the law of gravity will describe exactly what will happen if I throw myself out of an airplane. It describes what would happen if I did it without a parachute, and what would happen if I did it with a parachute. But the law it self is descriptive, not proscriptive. No one is going to arrest you for violating the law of gravity. Scientific laws did not need to be written like legislative laws, and they do not need to be enforced. Scientific laws are descriptions of observed natural phenomena (like gravity). Nothing more.

 

[sandor606]

Were we designed to breath oxygen?
Does life even need it?

How can you say we were designed if you don't know what life needs?

wa:do

Biologists know what life needs and that is why they say that all of life needs are fully satisfied by just-so nature of its parts, whether physical, chemical, or biochemical. Respiration is, of course, a key part. Hold your breath for some minutes and experience first-hand whether you need oxygen or not.

 

[painted wolf]

Biologists know what life needs and that is why they say that all of life needs are fully satisfied by just-so nature of its parts, whether physical, chemical, or biochemical. Respiration is, of course, a key part. Hold your breath for some minutes and experience first-hand whether you need oxygen or not.

I may need oxygen... but quite a lot of life gets along quite nicely without it.

Biologists know that life is far more variable and far more interesting than just humanity an what humanity needs to survive. Humans are not the pinnacle of life on Earth and the idea of anthropocentrism is beyond silly.

wa:do

 

[sandor606]

Exactly, the law of gravity will describe exactly what will happen if I throw myself out of an airplane. It describes what would happen if I did it without a parachute, and what would happen if I did it with a parachute. But the law it self is descriptive, not proscriptive. No one is going to arrest you for violating the law of gravity. Scientific laws did not need to be written like legislative laws, and they do not need to be enforced. Scientific laws are descriptions of observed natural phenomena (like gravity). Nothing more. [/quote

I see your point and accept the standard interpretation. Nevertheless, the question still remains as to how the phenomena that natural laws describe came to be precisely what they are with the values precisely that they have - like gravity.

 

[sandor606]

I may need oxygen... but quite a lot of life gets along quite nicely without it.

Biologists know that life is far more variable and far more interesting than just humanity an what humanity needs to survive. Humans are not the pinnacle of life on Earth and the idea of anthropocentrism is beyond silly.

wa:do

OK.:cigar:

 

[fantome profane]

I see your point and accept the standard interpretation. Nevertheless, the question still remains as to how the phenomena that natural laws describe came to be precisely what they are with the values precisely that they have - like gravity.

Ok, good question, but a question is not evidence of Intelligent Design. If you can tell me how they came to be precisely what they are, then we will have something to talk about. But an unanswered question is not evidence.

 

[ManTimeForgot]

Asking for evidence supporting or undermining intelligent design is beyond the scope of human capability. We are currently unable to probe the depths of reality beyond the quantum (I would argue this is due to a conceptual failure, but there is certainly still room for debate on this) and credible evidence of whether or not our universe was designed (or even reality beyond our universe) requires access to sources of information currently beyond our technical/personal ability.


Belief for or against intelligent design is just that: belief. We don't actually have enough evidence right now to say one way or another whether or not not our sector of reality was designed (let alone all of reality).


And parsimony (occam's razor) is no good here. We don't have any intervening factors/premises to contend with. A) Our Universe was created + X (we have no idea) = C) Our universe exists. A) Our universe spontaneously generated + X (we have no idea) = C) Our universe exists. These are equivalently complex because the "values" of X in each are equally unknown.

MTF

 

[sandor606]

lol... so who gives out tickets to the birds?
Or the space shuttle for that matter.

What is gravity Sandor...

you realize the "law of gravity" is just a description of the effect that mass has on other objects... (and possibly time).
Physics just is...

wa:do

What is being argued and shown by new science is that all that simply "is" in physics, chemistry, and biochemistry is just so because it has to be that way if carbon-based life is to evolve into homo sapiens. The goal - the evolution of Man - determines the nature of the means.

 

[sandor606]

Asking for evidence supporting or undermining intelligent design is beyond the scope of human capability. We are currently unable to probe the depths of reality beyond the quantum (I would argue this is due to a conceptual failure, but there is certainly still room for debate on this) and credible evidence of whether or not our universe was designed (or even reality beyond our universe) requires access to sources of information currently beyond our technical/personal ability.


Belief for or against intelligent design is just that: belief. We don't actually have enough evidence right now to say one way or another whether or not not our sector of reality was designed (let alone all of reality).



And parsimony (occam's razor) is no good here. We don't have any intervening factors/premises to contend with. A) Our Universe was created + X (we have no idea) = C) Our universe exists. A) Our universe spontaneously generated + X (we have no idea) = C) Our universe exists. These are equivalently complex because the "values" of X in each are equally unknown.

MTF

Some scientists opine otherwise.

 

[painted wolf]

What is being argued and shown by new science is that all that simply "is" in physics, chemistry, and biochemistry is just so because it has to be that way if carbon-based life is to evolve into homo sapiens. The goal - the evolution of Man - determines the nature of the means.

Humanity is not the goal.
Such egocentric bias has no place in biology... this is still a world run by bacteria. (and we would not survive without them, though they would be fine without us.)

You should study biology... it's quite humbling.

wa:do

 

[sandor606]

Ok, good question, but a question is not evidence of Intelligent Design. If you can tell me how they came to be precisely what they are, then we will have something to talk about. But an unanswered question is not evidence.

The ball is in your court. I asked the question, you tell me. When you tell me then we will have something to talk about.

 

[fantome profane]

The ball is in your court. I asked the question, you tell me. When you tell me then we will have something to talk about.

No problem, when I have the answer I will get back to you. Till then there is still no evidence of Intelligent Design.

 

[sandor606]

Humanity is not the goal.
Such egocentric bias has no place in biology... this is still a world run by bacteria. (and we would not survive without them, though they would be fine without us.)

You should study biology... it's quite humbling.


wa:do

Tell that to the scientists who make the claim. And I did study biology :yes: and if you had we could now have an educated conversation about these wonderful discoveries, something that at the present time is obviously not possible.

 

[sandor606]

No problem, when I have the answer I will get back to you. Till then there is still no evidence of Intelligent Design.

Right now, until then, and beyond :yes: there is.

 

[ManTimeForgot]

Some scientists opine otherwise.

You are right. Some claim that anyone with a good understanding of Quantum Physics requires the existence of a godlike being/semblance of reality. Whereas some would claim that anything that is even tangentially associated with superstitious gobbledey-gook is wrong by fiat.

I think I will just keep an open mind.

MTF

 

[painted wolf]

Tell that to the scientists who make the claim. And I did study biology :yes: and if you had we could now have an educated conversation about these wonderful discoveries, something that at the present time is obviously not possible.

Seeing as they generally aren't working biologists... I'm sure they could use the info.
You studied biology but were unaware of anaerobic life?

I'm a working biologist get as technical as you like.

wa:do

 

[Gentoo]

I think I'd like to hear this as well.

 

[sandor606]

You are right. Some claim that anyone with a good understanding of Quantum Physics requires the existence of a godlike being/semblance of reality. Whereas some would claim that anything that is even tangentially associated with superstitious gobbledey-gook is wrong by fiat.

I think I will just keep an open mind.

MTF

Good for you.

 

[sandor606]

Seeing as they generally aren't working biologists... I'm sure they could use the info.
You studied biology but were unaware of anaerobic life?

I'm a working biologist get as technical as you like.

wa:do

Of course I have but anaerobic life includes only very simple organisms. Evolution from unicellular to multicellular forms of life could not have taken place without respiration.