The Mystery Thread

[Jollybear]

The difference between Evolution and Intelligent Design, is following the requirements of science:

1. Falsifiability
2. Scientific Method
3. Peer Review

ID failed in all 3 of these requirements.

Michael Behe, the chief expert witness for ID in the Kitzmiller vs Dover Area School District, admitted that none of the ID literature were ever peer reviewed, including Behe's own Irreducible Complexity and his book Darwin's Black Box.

While Philip Johnson and Stephen Meyer are considered the founder of Intelligent Design, Johnson have no qualification in ANY SCIENCE and Meyer was a former geophysicist, which leave Behe as the biggest name in biology, or more precisely biochemistry for the Discovery Institute.

The problem is that like Johnson and Meyer, Behe is not known for his integrity.

He even lie to the court that one of the names listed in his book as critical reviewer on his Black Box, Dr Michael Atchison, who was also like Behe, a biochemist, has read his manuscript before being published. When in fact, a letter from Atchison revealed that he never read Behe's Darwin Black Box.

If Atchison hasn't read Behe's book, then it is not possible for Atchison to review Behe's book.

Behe also admitted that he has never tested his paper on Irreducible Complexity, which means he failed in my second point "Scientific Method".

Even the university he worked as a biochemist professor, while respect his personal belief, don't condone him teaching his Irreducible Complexity to students, when his work on Irreducible Complexity is untested and unfalsifiable, which mean he failed in the 1st point "Falsifiability".

The leading scientists in Intelligent Design are Meyer and Behe, but neither has presented any hypothesis, that are falsifiable, testable, and peer reviewed.

And in order to test ID, you would have to be able to test Designer.

But if the Designer is beyond everyone ability to test, measure or detect (or observe), then how could ID have any evidence?

I just did a google search and found peer reviewed journals on ID. https://www.discovery.org/id/peer-review/

Also it appears to me that at a minimum, evolution/naturalism is just as unfalsifiable as ID is.

But hey, apart from all that. Just looking at nature, our bodies, the design and order is very prevalent.

If you see the words written in sand on a beach "hello, how are you today" would you need to test or find the person who did it in order to know someone did? Of course not. Its prevalent.

 

[gnostic]

If you see the words written in sand on a beach "hello, how are you today" would you need to test or find the person who did it in order to know someone did? Of course not. Its prevalent.

This example is nothing more than just false dichotomy.

Someone writing on the sand has nothing to do with the Designer alleged designing hairs, skin, tissues, organs, bones, shells, genes, etc.

When you use Intelligent Design, you are making a claim that some supernatural beings, be that be god, spirit or advanced aliens, designing and creating life.

That’s where ID become no better than in believing god of some religions, supposedly written by prophets. ID requires someone to take all this DESIGNER on pure blind faith. There are no evidences to support ID.

As to the Discovery Institute. They are not science organization; DI is PR organisation, spinning propaganda and misinformation. They have no legitimate grounds to Peer Review any scientific paper, report,article or book.

You know who are the founders of the Discovery Institute?

Both are ex-journalists.

George Gilder’s expertise and qualifications are in economics and politics.

Bruce Chapman’s qualification is in journalism, but like Gilder his career turns to politics.

Neither men are qualified as scientists. Not a lick science in the both of them.

Phillip Johnson was responsible for starting Intelligent Design at the Discovery Institute, and was the author of Wedge Strategy, which was manifesto of DI, which was to convertly push ID to be taught in school’s science, using not science, but propaganda in media, and using lawyers and politicians to pressure school boards to introduce ID.

Their Wedge Strategy demonstrates they have no interests in science. They don’t care about finding evidences to support their belief; all they wanted to do, is to have schools to teach creationism, by guiding creationism as “Intelligent Design”.

Johnson also have no background in science; he was a former lawyer and law professor.

So here you have 3 senior members of the Discovery Institute, none of them are qualified to say what and what isn’t science. DI cannot review any scientific hypotheses because it isn’t a science organisation.

 

[Jollybear]

This example is nothing more than just false dichotomy.

Someone writing on the sand has nothing to do with the Designer alleged designing hairs, skin, tissues, organs, bones, shells, genes, etc.

When you use Intelligent Design, you are making a claim that some supernatural beings, be that be god, spirit or advanced aliens, designing and creating life.

That’s where ID become no better than in believing god of some religions, supposedly written by prophets. ID requires someone to take all this DESIGNER on pure blind faith. There are no evidences to support ID.

As to the Discovery Institute. They are not science organization; DI is PR organisation, spinning propaganda and misinformation. They have no legitimate grounds to Peer Review any scientific paper, report,article or book.

You know who are the founders of the Discovery Institute?

Both are ex-journalists.

George Gilder’s expertise and qualifications are in economics and politics.

Bruce Chapman’s qualification is in journalism, but like Gilder his career turns to politics.

Neither men are qualified as scientists. Not a lick science in the both of them.

Phillip Johnson was responsible for starting Intelligent Design at the Discovery Institute, and was the author of Wedge Strategy, which was manifesto of DI, which was to convertly push ID to be taught in school’s science, using not science, but propaganda in media, and using lawyers and politicians to pressure school boards to introduce ID.

Their Wedge Strategy demonstrates they have no interests in science. They don’t care about finding evidences to support their belief; all they wanted to do, is to have schools to teach creationism, by guiding creationism as “Intelligent Design”.

Johnson also have no background in science; he was a former lawyer and law professor.

So here you have 3 senior members of the Discovery Institute, none of them are qualified to say what and what isn’t science. DI cannot review any scientific hypotheses because it isn’t a science organisation.

So you think theres no design and order or complexity within our world?

And do you concede there is peer reviewed journals on ID?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I think the evidence for design is not imaginary.

I do not know of any evidence that indicates design.

had my own, just because i cannot demonstrate them to others dont mean i havent had them.

This is true. But the end result is that they are not evidence that can be shown to someone else.

How else do you explain them?I have no explanation for them.

NDEs could be a neurological ghost for all I know. There is no reason to jump to one conclusion over another, except on the basis of the bias of the person drawing the conclusion.

There is no evidence supporting ESP. As Gnostic stated, the US and Soviet governments have spent money and time trying to verify ESP for military applications and found nothing to work with.

Why do you have faith? What are your reasons?

In part, I just do. It is also how I was raised and where I was raised. It is certain spiritual experiences that I cannot share validly, but exist for me. I cannot even be sure that those experiences were real. There will always be a shadow of doubt. I would expect that for any rational person.

Its on the basis of all of that list.

There is no sound scientific reason for the denial of evolution. All the remaining denial is personal view, based solely on belief, ignorance and misunderstanding. I see willful ignorance expressed on this forum as a position of strength.

 

[Jollybear]

I do not know of any evidence that indicates design.

Isnt it everywhere? The order, we all have eyes on our head, with a nose below it, a mouth below the nose, two ears on the side of the head. And on and on the order goes. The design of all the vital organs, if just one is taken out, we die. The DNA information as well.

This is true. But the end result is that they are not evidence that can be shown to someone else.

True, but its evidence to ourselves, the experiencer.

NDEs could be a neurological ghost for all I know. There is no reason to jump to one conclusion over another, except on the basis of the bias of the person drawing the conclusion.

Theres certain NDEs that have ESP parts to the experience. Showing the its really happening.

There is no evidence supporting ESP. As Gnostic stated, the US and Soviet governments have spent money and time trying to verify ESP for military applications and found nothing to work with.

I have come to a different conclusion on that one. The research on that has demonstrated an anomaly. Plus, certain ones involved in the project believe its real.

Ive had a small handfull of ESP examples happen to me.

In part, I just do. It is also how I was raised and where I was raised. It is certain spiritual experiences that I cannot share validly, but exist for me. I cannot even be sure that those experiences were real. There will always be a shadow of doubt. I would expect that for any rational person.

What has been your experiences?

There is no sound scientific reason for the denial of evolution. All the remaining denial is personal view, based solely on belief, ignorance and misunderstanding. I see willful ignorance expressed on this forum as a position of strength.

I also think theres personal belief, ignorence and such from the naturalists.

 

[gnostic]

So you think theres no design and order or complexity within our world?

And do you concede there is peer reviewed journals on ID?

Complexity don’t mean “design”, Jollybear...at least not “design” in the sense that require or imply a Designer or Designers, as advocated by its followers (eg Discovery Institute).

You apparently don’t understand the concept of EVIDENCE.

EVIDENCES are something that you can observe or detect, something you can measure or quantify, something you can test, etc.

To date, no one in the ID camp have ever being being able to observe/detect, measure, quantify or test this Designer, so if none of these are possible, then the “lack of evidences” for the Designer, would indicate that there is very high probability that the Designer don’t exist.

You can no more observe, measure or test the Designer than you could with God and Satan, heaven and hell, ghouls and goblins, fairies and pixies, Scylla and Charybdis, Sauron and Gandalf, and so on. The Designer is just fictional and mythological as what I had listed above.

 

[Jollybear]

Complexity don’t mean “design”, Jollybear...at least not “design” in the sense that require or imply a Designer or Designers, as advocated by its followers (eg Discovery Institute).

Why does complexity not mean design?

You apparently don’t understand the concept of EVIDENCE.


EVIDENCES are something that you can observe or detect, something you can measure or quantify, something you can test, etc.

Complexity and design can and is observed or detected.

To date, no one in the ID camp have ever being being able to observe/detect, measure, quantify or test this Designer, so if none of these are possible, then the “lack of evidences” for the Designer, would indicate that there is very high probability that the Designer don’t exist.

You can no more observe, measure or test the Designer than you could with God and Satan, heaven and hell, ghouls and goblins, fairies and pixies, Scylla and Charybdis, Sauron and Gandalf, and so on. The Designer is just fictional and mythological as what I had listed above.

You went from the design to the designer. Im talking about just design, not the designer. You dont need to see or test the designer in order to see design in nature.

Its like we dont need to see vehicles, buildings, cups, knives, ect, being built and designed in order to detect design when we see them.

 

[gnostic]

You went from the design to the designer. Im talking about just design, not the designer. You dont need to see or test the designer in order to see design in nature.

Its like we dont need to see vehicles, buildings, cups, knives, ect, being built and designed in order to detect design when we see them.

But the whole concept of Intelligent Design, is about the Designer.

What do you think the "Intelligent" mean in ID?

It mean there are some intelligent entities are involved, hence the Designer.

And you using man-made objects, is nothing more than crap.

If you see a building. You would know that there are architect, engineer, surveyors, project manager, contractor, subcontractors involved, whoever owned the design business and whoever owned the construction, and so on.

They have names, address, phones, parents, social security numbers, you could find out if they are , male or female, single or married, children or no children, and so on, because they are real people involved in the design and construction of the building. You could track these people down, meet with them, talk to them.

And it is the same, with those who make vehicles, cups and knives, etc, you can track down the company that sell them, distribute them, store them in the warehouse, manufacture them and design them. Of course, some have machines, to make them and assemble them, so can track down the person who design the machine, who have the machines patented.

You get what I am getting at, Jollybear, there are of course, designer who make man-made objects or construct buildings, roads, bridges.

The same cannot be said about the so-called Intelligent Designer of life, of Earth or of the Universe. The Designer in ID is just myth, fabricated by dishonest creationists (eg Discovery Institute), pretending that ID is a valid science alternative to evolution.

A) ID isn't a scientific theory.
B) ID isn't even a working falsifiable hypothesis.
C) Which lead me to C, that ID is pseudoscience or junk science.​

The manifesto of Discovery Institute revealed the true motive and the way they intend to operate Intelligent Design. Intelligent Design isn't a pursuit of science to understand nature or life, but about ID as a hidden creationism, to be taught in school. They have no interest in science, but they are interests in using political, legal and social pressures on schools and universities, so it would be taught as science.

That to me, give indication of their lack of integrity and insidious tactics/propaganda to how they want to slip ID to the naive.

So don't give me these absurd examples that used false dichotomy.

Why does complexity not mean design?

Because you need EVIDENCES that it is design. All you are doing is making claims of design, but nothing demonstrate designs come from the DESIGNER.

Making claims, or implying one thing leads to another, is just nothing more than dishonest sophistry.

 

[Wisdom of Ages]

Take it easy. Take it slow. No fuss.

First question. Is it okay for me to reject evolution while accepting other tenets of science?

What a truly IDIOTIC statement......Do YOU need permission to think and reason ? are YOU that HYPNOTIZED by some
Church or Mosque parasite vampire ? that you are DEVOID of cognitive ability ? SAD INDEED....

Information...in any form is subject to interpretation and the possibility of other outcomes...like the EARTH was flat somewhere in HUMAN existence...to some..not all humans...or that the EARTH was the center of everything...? the Ancient Sumerians knew
it was not....and that was 5-6000 years ago....

YOU are an IMBECILE...easily manipulated by clever mind molesters to accept whatever YOU are TOLD as an absolute TRUTH ! by who. ?...not one HUMAN on EARTH knows how the BRAIN functions....where thought is located..how it is manifested...how the imagination even exists...and YOU....a FOOL...an easy target of Religious Mind Molesters are unable
to think and reason the OBVIOUS....all information is subject to POSSIBILITIES...even that which seems to be absolute...
can be undone ! .....regardless...it is truly PATHETIC haw humans attempt to ANSWER that which as no definitive ANSWER

.....and SO WHAT ? what does this information do for YOU ? or is it more like.."WHAT YOU DO WITH THE INFORMATION" ?

Yeah, something like that.....just because some HYPNOTIZED PARASITE VAMPIRE accepts something as absolute doe not mean anyone else HAS TO ! .....that is the essence of INSANITY....not an OPEN MIND that considers the possibility of anything without becoming so consumed they lose their MIND and LIFE over it....

 

[Jollybear]

But the whole concept of Intelligent Design, is about the Designer.

What do you think the "Intelligent" mean in ID?

It mean there are some intelligent entities are involved, hence the Designer.

And you using man-made objects, is nothing more than crap.

If you see a building. You would know that there are architect, engineer, surveyors, project manager, contractor, subcontractors involved, whoever owned the design business and whoever owned the construction, and so on.

They have names, address, phones, parents, social security numbers, you could find out if they are , male or female, single or married, children or no children, and so on, because they are real people involved in the design and construction of the building. You could track these people down, meet with them, talk to them.

And it is the same, with those who make vehicles, cups and knives, etc, you can track down the company that sell them, distribute them, store them in the warehouse, manufacture them and design them. Of course, some have machines, to make them and assemble them, so can track down the person who design the machine, who have the machines patented.

You get what I am getting at, Jollybear, there are of course, designer who make man-made objects or construct buildings, roads, bridges.

The same cannot be said about the so-called Intelligent Designer of life, of Earth or of the Universe. The Designer in ID is just myth, fabricated by dishonest creationists (eg Discovery Institute), pretending that ID is a valid science alternative to evolution.

A) ID isn't a scientific theory.
B) ID isn't even a working falsifiable hypothesis.
C) Which lead me to C, that ID is pseudoscience or junk science.​

The manifesto of Discovery Institute revealed the true motive and the way they intend to operate Intelligent Design. Intelligent Design isn't a pursuit of science to understand nature or life, but about ID as a hidden creationism, to be taught in school. They have no interest in science, but they are interests in using political, legal and social pressures on schools and universities, so it would be taught as science.

That to me, give indication of their lack of integrity and insidious tactics/propaganda to how they want to slip ID to the naive.

So don't give me these absurd examples that used false dichotomy.



Because you need EVIDENCES that it is design. All you are doing is making claims of design, but nothing demonstrate designs come from the DESIGNER.

Making claims, or implying one thing leads to another, is just nothing more than dishonest sophistry.

Lets go back to my illustration of "hello, how are you today" marked in sand on the beach.

You cant "track down" that person to find out if ir who did it. So, how do you not know, wind, birds, crabs, water didnt over time and chance create those words?

We know because we detect design in the words.

Theres no dishonesty in this conclusion.

 

[Earthling]

What a truly IDIOTIC statement......Do YOU need permission to think and reason ? are YOU that HYPNOTIZED by some
Church or Mosque parasite vampire ? that you are DEVOID of cognitive ability ? SAD INDEED....

Information...in any form is subject to interpretation and the possibility of other outcomes...like the EARTH was flat somewhere in HUMAN existence...to some..not all humans...or that the EARTH was the center of everything...? the Ancient Sumerians knew
it was not....and that was 5-6000 years ago....

YOU are an IMBECILE...easily manipulated by clever mind molesters to accept whatever YOU are TOLD as an absolute TRUTH ! by who. ?...not one HUMAN on EARTH knows how the BRAIN functions....where thought is located..how it is manifested...how the imagination even exists...and YOU....a FOOL...an easy target of Religious Mind Molesters are unable
to think and reason the OBVIOUS....all information is subject to POSSIBILITIES...even that which seems to be absolute...
can be undone ! .....regardless...it is truly PATHETIC haw humans attempt to ANSWER that which as no definitive ANSWER

.....and SO WHAT ? what does this information do for YOU ? or is it more like.."WHAT YOU DO WITH THE INFORMATION" ?

Yeah, something like that.....just because some HYPNOTIZED PARASITE VAMPIRE accepts something as absolute doe not mean anyone else HAS TO ! .....that is the essence of INSANITY....not an OPEN MIND that considers the possibility of anything without becoming so consumed they lose their MIND and LIFE over it....

Boy howdy the heathens are running amok today. Is it the eggnog? Look at the emphasis manifested through the upper case in some of the atheist responses I've had in just a couple hours.

WALK IT OFF PAL!

 

[Jollybear]

What a truly IDIOTIC statement......Do YOU need permission to think and reason ? are YOU that HYPNOTIZED by some
Church or Mosque parasite vampire ? that you are DEVOID of cognitive ability ? SAD INDEED....

Information...in any form is subject to interpretation and the possibility of other outcomes...like the EARTH was flat somewhere in HUMAN existence...to some..not all humans...or that the EARTH was the center of everything...? the Ancient Sumerians knew
it was not....and that was 5-6000 years ago....

YOU are an IMBECILE...easily manipulated by clever mind molesters to accept whatever YOU are TOLD as an absolute TRUTH ! by who. ?...not one HUMAN on EARTH knows how the BRAIN functions....where thought is located..how it is manifested...how the imagination even exists...and YOU....a FOOL...an easy target of Religious Mind Molesters are unable
to think and reason the OBVIOUS....all information is subject to POSSIBILITIES...even that which seems to be absolute...
can be undone ! .....regardless...it is truly PATHETIC haw humans attempt to ANSWER that which as no definitive ANSWER

.....and SO WHAT ? what does this information do for YOU ? or is it more like.."WHAT YOU DO WITH THE INFORMATION" ?

Yeah, something like that.....just because some HYPNOTIZED PARASITE VAMPIRE accepts something as absolute doe not mean anyone else HAS TO ! .....that is the essence of INSANITY....not an OPEN MIND that considers the possibility of anything without becoming so consumed they lose their MIND and LIFE over it....

What a truly IDIOTIC statement......Do YOU need permission to think and reason ? are YOU that HYPNOTIZED by some
Atheist or naturalistic science parasite vampire ? that you are DEVOID of cognitive ability ? SAD INDEED....

Information...in any form is subject to interpretation and the possibility of other outcomes...like the EARTH was flat somewhere in HUMAN existence...to some..not all humans...or that the EARTH was the center of everything...? the Ancient Sumerians knew
it was not....and that was 5-6000 years ago....

YOU are an IMBECILE...easily manipulated by clever mind molesters to accept whatever YOU are TOLD as an absolute TRUTH ! by who. ?...not one HUMAN on EARTH knows how the BRAIN functions....where thought is located..how it is manifested...how the imagination even exists...and YOU....a FOOL...an easy target of atheistic/materialistic/naturalism Mind Molesters are unable
to think and reason the OBVIOUS....all information is subject to POSSIBILITIES...even that which seems to be absolute...
can be undone ! .....regardless...it is truly PATHETIC haw humans attempt to ANSWER that which as no definitive ANSWER

.....and SO WHAT ? what does this information do for YOU ? or is it more like.."WHAT YOU DO WITH THE INFORMATION" ?

Yeah, something like that.....just because some HYPNOTIZED PARASITE VAMPIRE accepts something as absolute doe not mean anyone else HAS TO ! .....that is the essence of INSANITY....not an OPEN MIND that considers the possibility of anything without becoming so consumed they lose their MIND and LIFE over it...

 

[gnostic]

Lets go back to my illustration of "hello, how are you today" marked in sand on the beach.

You cant "track down" that person to find out if ir who did it. So, how do you not know, wind, birds, crabs, water didnt over time and chance create those words?

We know because we detect design in the words.

Theres no dishonesty in this conclusion.

Again, that have nothing with concept of Intelligent Design.

The ID concept is about how life were designed and created, or how the Earth were designed and created. Or how snowflakes were designed or created.

Your example, again is only humans doing the work, like writing on the sand. Not the same thing.

Now, if you can give me an example of human designing the DNA, designing the organs, tissues or other body parts of humans or animals, then you are giving an example in which I can compare to ID.

Writing on the sand "Hello, how are you today?" to ID are completely unrelated to each other.

Humans are not invisible or nonexistent being like this Designer.

Your example is like comparing one fruit with a doormat. One is naturally grown, while the other is clearly man-made using materials to make the doormat.

 

[Jollybear]

Again, that have nothing with concept of Intelligent Design.

The ID concept is about how life were designed and created, or how the Earth were designed and created. Or how snowflakes were designed or created.

Your example, again is only humans doing the work, like writing on the sand. Not the same thing.

Now, if you can give me an example of human designing the DNA, designing the organs, tissues or other body parts of humans or animals, then you are giving an example in which I can compare to ID.

Writing on the sand "Hello, how are you today?" to ID are completely unrelated to each other.

Humans are not invisible or nonexistent being like this Designer.

Your example is like comparing one fruit with a doormat. One is naturally grown, while the other is clearly man-made using materials to make the doormat.

Look at our eyes, everyone has two, one nose below it, one mouth below it, two ears on side of head. The order is the same.

All our vital organs, take one out, we die.

The order and design is detected in this.

 

[sayak83]

Ok, i read it.....i dont see that as proof, i can see how you might see it as evidence. But, i see it as inference and explanations to certain data and species.

Heres an article that has already done the work of countering these things.

Is Tiktaalik Evolution’s Greatest Missing Link?

Science does not deal with proof. Its always evidence and inferences and predictions based on that evidence.
See below,
Scientific Proof Is A Myth
In order to come up with a model capable of predicting what will happen under a variety of conditions, we need to understand a few things.

1. What we're capable of measuring, and to what precision.
2. What's been measured thus far, under specific initial conditions.
3. What laws hold for these phenomena, i.e., what observed relationships exist between specific quantities.
4. And what the limits are for the things we presently know.

If you understand these things, you have the right ingredients to formulate a scientific theory: a framework for explaining what we already know happens as well as predicting what will happen under new, untested circumstances.
Our best theories, like the aforementioned theory of evolution, the Big Bang theory, and Einstein's General Relativity, cover all of these bases. They have an underlying quantitative framework, enabling us to predict what will happen under a variety of situations, and to then go out and test those predictions empirically. So far, these theories have demonstrated themselves to be eminently valid. Where their predictions can be described by mathematical expressions, we can tell not only what should happen, but by how much. For these theories in particular, among many others, measurements and observations that have been performed to test these theories have been supremely successful.

But as validating as that is — and as powerful as it is to falsify alternatives — it's completely impossible to prove anything in science.

In your link, you need to tell me what specifically seems convincing to you as a counterargument. To me it looks like a lot of hand waving.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Look at our eyes, everyone has two, one nose below it, one mouth below it, two ears on side of head. The order is the same.

All our vital organs, take one out, we die.

The order and design is detected in this.

I see nothing that indicates design and all you have done is declare that there is order and design in it without demonstrating the existence of design. All that can be demonstrated from science is that our development--the number and placement of our structures and organs--is guided by genes. Some of those genes are highly conserved and exist in other, very distantly related, organisms and do much the same job with the development and respective structures of those organisms.

Did you know that all dogs have the same genes controlling there snout development, but it is how long those genes are switched on that determine if they have a short face or a long face? You can achieve great diversity with the same genes, depending on when in development they express and for how long.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I just did a google search and found peer reviewed journals on ID. https://www.discovery.org/id/peer-review/

Also it appears to me that at a minimum, evolution/naturalism is just as unfalsifiable as ID is.

But hey, apart from all that. Just looking at nature, our bodies, the design and order is very prevalent.

If you see the words written in sand on a beach "hello, how are you today" would you need to test or find the person who did it in order to know someone did? Of course not. Its prevalent.

There is only a single case of an ID article reaching a peer reviewed journal in the scientific mainstream. All the rest are just ID reviewers rubber stamping articles by other ID advocates.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Isnt it everywhere? The order, we all have eyes on our head, with a nose below it, a mouth below the nose, two ears on the side of the head. And on and on the order goes. The design of all the vital organs, if just one is taken out, we die. The DNA information as well.

It is true, that without a heart or lungs or some other organs, we would die quickly or at least quicker than a person with all of their original equipment intact. But this is no indication of design or that we couldn't be derived by slow or even periods of punctuated evolution. With a few exceptions, all mammals have very much the same sets of organs, but each species did not have to develop them independently. Some remote common ancestor evolved them and then mammals radiated off of that ancestor. It didn't even have to be a mammal to catch most of those organs. There are things that are alive and don't have the same organs that we do, all of them or any of them.

True, but its evidence to ourselves, the experiencer.

But even that evidence isn't definitive. Maybe I'm insane and experience hallucinations that seem very real to me. Or maybe I did and now I don't, but I still can't tell the difference. It doesn't even have to have resulted from insanity. I could have been in a heightened state of some type and be easily convinced. How do we know. My experiences are personal, but I feel they were real. I just cannot share that with another to convince them with evidence. It would be oratory and argument only.

certain NDEs that have ESP parts to the experience. Showing the its really happening.

We don't really know what an NDE is, so declaring them an experience with the world beyond is biased and premature. I have found no convincing scientific evidence that compells me to consider ESP is an actual ability. I myself, have experienced times when I was thinking about a person that I haven't talked to in a great deal of time and then that person calls or I run into them. It could be ESP, but it could be coincidence. Since there is a existing concenction--even one separated in time and distance--there is a greater chance that person might circle back into my life. Maybe I think about the people I know a lot and am bound to have a few of the more separated individuals pop in during those times. If I could really read minds, I would do something with that and one of those things would be to enrich myself personally. Maybe people do that and hide the fact, but then they would leave no evidence of the origin of their wealth coming from ESP. So, that is a dead end.

Do I think it would be cool if ESP existed or even that NDEs really were experiences with an afterlife. Yes. Do I think there is evidence for them, beyond the anecdotal or biased interpretation. No.

I have come to a different conclusion on that one. The research on that has demonstrated an anomaly. Plus, certain ones involved in the project believe its real.

Ive had a small handfull of ESP examples happen to me.

I could see advantages in the existence of it, but even if it did exist, that doesn't mean that it is of a spiritual origin. There would be survival advantages that such traits would impart. Considering the advantages, I would expect such a trait to be highly expressed in the greater population. Along with abilities to prevent it or block it.

Like I said, I have had events occur on numerous occasions that have the feel of some kind of ESP event, but could be merely coincidence and the result of low probability events occurring do to large numbers of trials that happen naturally.

I'm not against the idea of ESP, it is just that I have seen nothing that provides strong evidence that those abilities--traits--exist.

What has been your experiences?

It is personal, but no visitation by spirits or anything like that. No disembodied voices advising me. Just feelings and senses that guided me. I couldn't even tell you it wasn't my own subconscious acting on my own active mind in a way that seemed like it was of external origin.

In fact, were I to hear a voice that had all of my own imaginings of what I perceive the "voice of God" to be like or to see what is the classical image of a very European Jesus that filled my childhood Sunday school classes, I would question my own sanity on the occurrence. It would be a shaking experience, no matter what prompted it.

I also think theres personal belief, ignorence and such from the naturalists.

Sure. Some. But I don't see it as much from that end, if I am reviewing it with honest critical analysis.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Again, that have nothing with concept of Intelligent Design.

The ID concept is about how life were designed and created, or how the Earth were designed and created. Or how snowflakes were designed or created.

Your example, again is only humans doing the work, like writing on the sand. Not the same thing.

Now, if you can give me an example of human designing the DNA, designing the organs, tissues or other body parts of humans or animals, then you are giving an example in which I can compare to ID.

Writing on the sand "Hello, how are you today?" to ID are completely unrelated to each other.

Humans are not invisible or nonexistent being like this Designer.

Your example is like comparing one fruit with a doormat. One is naturally grown, while the other is clearly man-made using materials to make the doormat.

It is a very obvious fact that we are intelligent and we design and create things. As you say, that does not follow that a being we cannot perceive in any way, itself exists and is the designer of all the natural world.

This does not mean that such a being does not exist. It only means that seashells, mountains, pretty sunsets, the stars, kangaroos, butterflies, flowers and song birds are not evidence of that being. I think that difference causes a great deal of confusion for creationists. They equate the refutation of that logical fallacy as a denial of God, when it is only refuting the claim that the evidence of the natural world indicates a designer.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Lets go back to my illustration of "hello, how are you today" marked in sand on the beach.

You cant "track down" that person to find out if ir who did it. So, how do you not know, wind, birds, crabs, water didnt over time and chance create those words?

We know because we detect design in the words.

Theres no dishonesty in this conclusion.

We cannot know who wrote the message. It could be God. It could be aliens. It could be Bigfoot on a beach holiday. It could be random chance events that resulted in shapes in the sand that look very much like a message. Without viewing it being written we can't completely eliminate those and many other possibilities. But we know that people write. We know they visit the beach. There are probably people on the beach the day we see the message. The number will depend on the location and time of year. We know that people write messages in the dirt, sand, on rocks, on buildings and so forth. Having no experience or evidence for any of the other possible sources of the message, the most probable conclusion is that a person wrote the message.

Your conclusion is not dishonest. Taking it further and stating that human design indicates a designer is not necessarily dishonest either and I don't perceive you are using it dishonestly, but the fact is that the one--divine design--does not logically follow the other--human design.