Scientific and logical objections to evolution...

[Unhappy438]

If you admit that you have to admit ID is science. This is perfect example of the double standard. I don't care if philosophy is discussed as it's pertinent but Porch apparently does so better report it.

No i dont ID has not conformed to the Scientific method. Please note i said this later on however.

Are the IDers presenting their arguments with Scientific facts? If they are i dont see a problem, but as i said lets just leave it to the mods to decide.

 

[Techne]

Oh you mean philosophical concepts because you're banned from PD and like to destroy all other threads by turning them into PD-man-gravy for your pleasure? Obviously you can't be referring to aspects relating to our physical existence in this universe, or they'd have a physical, testable bearing.

Congrats on once again trying to drag this down your path. Not sure what pleasure you get from it but knowing your style, I'm betting it's twisted and masochistic to the nth degree...

I don't really know what your problem is, but it is trivially true that empirical science cannot provide answers to many and varied important questions.

 

[Unhappy438]

From Wiki..hahaha. They're part of it.

Yeah man these guys don't know the truth, Evolution is just a fabrication by the Illuminati and they use Wiki to push this agenda. Obama is also a lizard man.

 

[Swa]

Continuing from here

Oh if its correct, then ok i'd say science is wrong and start trying to find god or the designer. Then i'd probably move on and go have lunch I dont know but you think scientists care if their wrong?

So are you agreeing then that ID can't prove God? At most it can prove there is a designer but it will be up to everybody's own reasoning to determine who that designer is. See the bit on intervention theory here.

Why then bring religion into it and claim that ID isn't science based on our religion?

With the exception of ID, the things you have mentioned all have standards against which they compare something to establish "designeyness". (EDIT: wait... to the best of my knowledge I can't think how forensic scientists have anything to do with establishing "designeyness" so that would be another exception albeit for a different reason than that seen in ID)

As far as I am aware there is no reliable standard for designeyness in organisms.

Why the double standard against ID here? Funny enough when NASA started the SETI program the religious (some of them) were up in arms over it and everyone else was working with and supporting them to determine how to establish "designeyness." Now it seems the numbers have just turned and there is no determination of "designeyness" in ID because it's already been declared by some to not be science.

 

[TJ99]

What is up with all the crazy stinking up the NS section these days? Isn't PD specifically there for the posts trolling us with irrelevant jibber-jabber and Off-Topic specifically there for trolling us with retarded conspiracy theories, lizard-men, unicorns, Wikipedia being owned by the Illuminati or related nonsense?

FFS we have robots driving around on other planets and actually advancing mankind's (rather limited) knowledge of the universe we live in, and we still have to deal with this kind of crap at home? I sometimes wonder if we deserve to survive as a species in the first place.

 

[Swa]

Um, Ekstasis claimed there is a conspiracy of scientists and information outlets controlling this all. He is quite open about it. Perhaps put on those spectacles and try again...

I didn't see him claim that. Correct me if I'm wrong here but it was actually you who used the word here first like it always is. It's more like a systematic self delusion than a conspiracy.

Ah right. Einstein's theories are no big deal at all. Gotcha. The majority of mankind will disagree with you, especially considering that most of technology has its basis in his theories, but nonetheless - what does the rest of the world know, right? We've got you to set us straight...

It's no big deal to anybody's beliefs. As I pointed out the speed of light is actually a barrier that's wished away so they have every reason to report on findings to the contrary. Virtually every atheist on this planet however wants evolution to be true so there is a major self interest in not even looking for anything to the contrary.

If it is disproven, then so be it. I couldn't give a hoot. Whatever is proven thereafter will shape my understanding of the world around me. Until then, and without any credible evidence that this global conspiracy of scientists is pulling the wool over our eyes, I'm gonna stick with what we both observe, and can prove. Evolution...



Ah, and once again the belief system claim comes to the fore. Considering it was just discussed two days ago, in great depth, and you are well aware of this, I am not going to turn this into another back and forth about your warped definition. Be my guest. I'll be at my atheist temple drinking fermented hop-water...

We keep getting our beliefs dragged into this so what's good for the goose is good for the gander. So you want me to believe that your beliefs don't play a part in this? Just like you believe me when I tell you the issue here is not my beliefs but the actual evidence that is always claimed to prove evolution but never does? Come on man let's settle this. Why not just admit that the real reason here is because you want to believe it's true? Because without evolution you have to look for it somewhere else so you have no reason to want to look at anything to the contrary. You want to continue believing in your fantasy where the only one you are accountable to is yourself. It's not so nice when the show is on the other foot hey?

 

[RiaX]

"Intelligent Design is a science-based rebuttal to Darwinism that uses modern microbiological evidence to claim that macro-evolution is simply not possible, and does not account for life on Earth. They postulate that life is so incredibly complex at its most basic level, there is no plausible explanation for it to exist other than that at some point an "intelligent" entity (they do not specify this entity, but it would be vastly more intelligent than humans) had to consciously and deliberately create life."

macro-evolution ? so they say evolution exists and it doesnt exists. Utter rubbish. There is no such thing as macro and micro evolution. THEY ALL ARE ORGANISMS EVEN IF THEY SO SMALL TO BE SEEN THROUGH A MICROSCOPE

cells ---> tissues ---> organs ---> complex thing .... repeat after me say it.

What kind of idiot seperates evolution into microscopic and macroscopic. Its like saying you get electrons and you get protons but there no such thing as an atom .... morons

 

[RiaX]

Science doesn't have logical answers for everything ....lad.

Thats when we say "I do not know" we dont say "god did it"

name one proven FACT of science thats not logical

 

[DJ...]

I didn't see him claim that. Correct me if I'm wrong here but it was actually you who used the word here first like it always is. It's more like a systematic self delusion than a conspiracy.

Oh for christ's sake - now you're just trolling for the sake of it to piss people off, surely? He made the claim - just read up a few posts. He even claimed Wikipedia are in on the conspiracy ffs. Stop defending people because you share a belief. It is disgusting behaviour...

It's no big deal to anybody's beliefs. As I pointed out the speed of light is actually a barrier that's wished away

That's wished away by who? :wtf:

Virtually every atheist on this planet however wants evolution to be true so there is a major self interest in not even looking for anything to the contrary.

You make a lot of claims but never back it up with evidence. If there are studies looking at motives for evolution among atheists, then please post them. Or you're simply making schit up again. I can tell you from my perspective, that if another theory was proposed, that was scientifically proven, that disproves evolution, I'd gladly change my position. I just posted that though in the post you quoted, so I'm not sure why it requires repeating over and over. Oh yes that's right - because you completely overlooked that and simply quoted for the sake of it serving as a soapbox for you...

We keep getting our beliefs dragged into this

I haven't once dragged your beliefs into this. Stop lying...

So you want me to believe that your beliefs don't play a part in this?

I told you I refuse to play this game in here. You know full well that atheism is not a belief system and I kindly request that if you want to continue this line of argumentative hogwash, that you do it in the thread that you were involved in just a few days ago where the arguments are put forward in a pragmatic manner, that doesn't require the further derailment of this thread...

 

[Jab]

 

[RiaX]

ROFL