Sign up with GoogleA book by an ID proponent?
Okay lets play that game...
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariots_of_the_Gods?
-
Ask a question and get free supportUnlock new privileges and see hidden discussionsWin prizes and earn reputation
-
Question of the day ~ How often do you braai?
-
Afristay giveaway.Win a 2-night stay for two people at an establishment of your choice with R1,000 in spending money. Enter here.
Discovery may lead to a review of the theory of evolution
- Thread starter Techne
- Start date
A book by an ID proponent?
Okay lets play that game...
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariots_of_the_Gods?
But my guy is not a criminal or fraudster ,Source :http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_von_Däniken
Däniken was convicted of several financial crimes, including fraud, shortly after publication of his first book.[5] He later became a co-founder of the Archaeology, Astronautics and SETI Research Association (AAS RA), and designed the theme park Mystery Park in Interlaken, Switzerland, that first opened on 23 May 2003.[6]
Unhappy438
Honorary Master
- Joined
- May 25, 2011
- Messages
- 24,915
SETI uses electromagnetic radiation to monitor for signs of transmissions from civilizations on other worlds. Thats a Scientific methodology.
I know, putting that guys book there was satire, ancient aliens? rofl I watch ancient aliens as a comedy series.
Thought someone might see the humor.
They are trying to argue that it's not empirically scientific like for example Evolution where when they test they get positive results.
No results is not negative results however.
And it's laughable that anyone thinks they're in the same league as ID hogwash that never was or will be a friend of science.
We are proof that a civilisation can evolve and become intelligent, by that conclusion and the amount of stars planets and solar systems in the universe(s), it is probable that there is other intelligent life out there.
At least SETI isn't pissing all over biology while it looks for life on other planets. Harvard and Berkely universities have SETI centers, SETI Institute has helped NASA on space missions and ID is being compared to SETI? what a joke. Shows you how desperate the proponents are to have some sort of legitimacy.
Last edited:
Unhappy438
Honorary Master
- Joined
- May 25, 2011
- Messages
- 24,915
Except it has produced results even if they are not significant. Also i would like to add that by them not finding what they have been looking for is a result in itself.
From wiki :
We can continue with Techne's warped view of thinking, is string theory now not Science because it also is yet to reach its primary goal. I can list 100s of other things that haven't reached their goal but that doesn't mean its not Science. Stupid argument is stupid.
Last edited:
OrbitalDawn
Ulysses Everett McGill
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 47,031
As I said in my post, which you seemed to have misread or something. SETI is looking for patterns or occurrences similar to ones that we can produce, with our limited knowledge of nature and how to manipulate it. So we have a standard that we can measure findings against. Naturally one would have to be very careful with any conclusions or extrapolations.
ID goes way beyond that and tries to point to a 'creator' that didn't only create some biological things that we could maybe reproduce (and use as a standard), but created the entire universe, including the natural laws that govern it. I'm not sure how you can't see the difference.
Mooi man
As I implied earlier, both ID and SETI are looking for patterns or occurrences similar to the ones we an produce.
SETI look for radiowaves that may have an intelligent source.
ID is looking for codes (e.g. genetic code or fine tuned constants) or machines that may have an intelligent source.
So both have some sort of standard.
Also, as explained earlier, ID cannot even IN PRINCIPLE get you to theism. So it cannot get you to something that produced the laws of physics (Again, whatever they are or mean) or created the universe.
And, like ID, SETI has no empirical method to confirm whether something is the result of intelligence without evidence of the intelligent source itself. And for this reason, SETI, like ID, is most likely not an empirical science that can empirically confirm its hypothesis. At best you may argue it is some sort of theoretical science, not an empirical science.
ID by principle cannot get you to theism?
Okay?
Intelligent design (ID) is a form of creationism promulgated by the Discovery Institute. The Institute defines it as the proposition that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection." [1][2] It is a contemporary adaptation of the traditional teleological argument for the existence of God, presented by its advocates as "an evidence-based scientific theory about life's origins" rather than "a religious-based idea". [3] The leading proponents of intelligent design are associated with the Discovery Institute, a politically conservative think tank, [n 1][4] and believe the designer to be the Christian deity. [n 2]
Okay?
Intelligent design (ID) is a form of creationism promulgated by the Discovery Institute. The Institute defines it as the proposition that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection." [1][2] It is a contemporary adaptation of the traditional teleological argument for the existence of God, presented by its advocates as "an evidence-based scientific theory about life's origins" rather than "a religious-based idea". [3] The leading proponents of intelligent design are associated with the Discovery Institute, a politically conservative think tank, [n 1][4] and believe the designer to be the Christian deity. [n 2]