How COULD it be designed IF there is no evidence that it is?
Since everything exists and there is no evidence of design, it must be. Anyway, your laughable attempt at straw man scientific methodology does not provide any reason to consider design to be any more than the religion that it is.
By this your saying something this big can be true without a shred of evidence.
I am saying that you have not been able to demonstrate the existence of design in nature or the existence of a designer.
Because there is no evidence for it.
This is the scientific method chart, right?
Ask a question: is the universe made by chance-time? Or is it made by a designer?
What is chance-time? Is this what scientists are really saying? Where are your references supporting this as a valid question. If you cannot show a designer, how can you ask questions about one?
read both views. Read prior peoples work.
What work would that be? There is no scientific work in ID.
Do direct research by looking to see if design is there or not.
What is your basis for determining the presence of design? Is it all just a circular argument or have you been holding out on us?
in this case, my hypothesis is that intelligent design exists in our world.
That is pretty tall order and so far, you have nothing. Why don't you think about it and maybe scale it down a bit to something you can demonstrate.
experiment is finding patterns and learning the purpose and functions of the many parts that make up species.
This would tell you something about the patterns and functions of whatever a part is that makes up a species. How would this show design. I am not seeing it.
Are you suggesting we test God?
Maybe you should define a little more closely what you mean here.
Peer reviewed, eh. So far, you haven't got a procedure. Just declare it into existence. That works fine. Right?
data and draw conclusion:
look at how all the functions of our bodies work, the purpose of each part and what it does. Do the same for bugs and plants and animals and earths processes, ect.
You're skipping out on species and moving to another subject completely? What happened to all the "parts" that make up a species? Where are you getting your funding? That's going to be a huge cash outlay. I want to talk to your guy. If he will pay for this garbage, I know he is going to love my work. I'll even be able to give him valid results.
Wait a minute. Earths processes. What happened to all your made up biology studies? Now you are doing earth science?
Results align with hypotheses or not?:
results in this case DO align with the hypotheses.
You have not done any of the mismatched, hodge podge of nothing that you claimed to do in the preceding so how can you have any results and how can they align with your hinky hypothesis. Why don't you just declare it so and publish. You'll save on page charges.
in the case of intelligent design; there has been scientists that propose ID that have submitted it for peer review. So....peer review was done for ID. This means it has been communicated.
The few that have tried were mostly tossed once it was clear that religion was the topic and not science.
Yes, whats wrong with it?
Aside from it being a straw man, it was funny to read.
Why is what i said inane?
Did I misspell that?
And my ethics are just fine, so if i wer teaching at the university, my ethics would have gotten me fired. Good thing.
It was my ethics that I referred to. If you feel guilty for some reason, that is on you. I do not think you will have to worry about getting a job teaching at the university.
Sometimes one needs to exercise courage against the power structure that is simply wrong.
Sometimes one needs to exercise courage and honesty against confused, perhaps well meaning people, and show them the error of their ways when they are simply wrong. At least let others know that the confused people are off track so that the original confusion does not spread.
