Science 101
My only question to you Wazoo, is where do you find your crack where you live?
Introduction to the Scientific Method:
They didn't come up with the theory first. They developed the theory based on the available evidence, and as of today, nothing (not a single thing) has come along to disprove the theory. And they're looking. That's another difference between evolution science and ID. They are looking at every bit of evidence that pops up and seeing if it fits. ID explains away anything that doesn't fit (dinosaur bones) with a lazy excuse (God put them there to fool us).
And hey, ponder this - there might be a higher power, and he may have designed DNA a billion years ago, or for that matter, maybe it was 5000 years ago and hid the dinosaur bones in the ground. But if that's the case, he did it so perfectly to make us think that evolution is true that he left absolutely no clue to his existence. In my opinion that makes a strong case for ID people studying evolution. Even assuming a God, he MUST have wanted us to consider evolution. Do you want to disappoint him?
Again - give me one piece of evidence that contradicts evolution. And I'll tell you what, if you do, I guarantee you a nobel prize. Evidence does not include, "well it's really hard to understand." Can you explain how a DVD works? I can't. Does that make gods of the engineers at Sony? How do you think Augustus Caesar would have reacted to seeing a jet plane or a video game console or a digital camera. He might have considered you a god if you busted your iPod all up in his grill. There's no telling how Caesar might have reacted to Amy Grant. But we're not gods; we're just more advanced than he is, and give him 2000 years, and he'll be bustin' System of a Down like any good pagan. Give us another 2000 years and maybe we'll have the whole DNA thing, origin of the universe, and all the rest of it figured out too.
To summarize: Evolution = some evidence. Intelligent Design = romantic but no evidence. People are trying to disprove evolution to try to win a nobel prize, but no one has been able to yet. We're really smart because as a species we've been alive for a long time, and we'll continue getting smarter up until Bush destroys the world. If there is a God, he believes in evolution too. Christian rock is awful. I'd say that's about it...
Introduction to the Scientific Method:
1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.There's no a or b or c. OK? There's one scientific method. (By the by, street cred - engineering degree from the University of Michigan). What Intelligent Design (as Creationism was cleverly renamed in the last 20 years by way of a contest) is lacking is evidence. Any evidence at all. Do you think that at some point a group of evil secularists came around with a plan to undermine the bible? We all know the story. Darwin was down on the Galapagos Islands, saw some weird animals and was hit with the inspiration of survival of the fittest. Observation and hypothesis. Admittedly, I'm not deeply schooled in evolutionary biology, but as it turns out, every bit of evidence they've found since then has fit the theory.
2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation.
3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.
4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments.
They didn't come up with the theory first. They developed the theory based on the available evidence, and as of today, nothing (not a single thing) has come along to disprove the theory. And they're looking. That's another difference between evolution science and ID. They are looking at every bit of evidence that pops up and seeing if it fits. ID explains away anything that doesn't fit (dinosaur bones) with a lazy excuse (God put them there to fool us).
And hey, ponder this - there might be a higher power, and he may have designed DNA a billion years ago, or for that matter, maybe it was 5000 years ago and hid the dinosaur bones in the ground. But if that's the case, he did it so perfectly to make us think that evolution is true that he left absolutely no clue to his existence. In my opinion that makes a strong case for ID people studying evolution. Even assuming a God, he MUST have wanted us to consider evolution. Do you want to disappoint him?
Again - give me one piece of evidence that contradicts evolution. And I'll tell you what, if you do, I guarantee you a nobel prize. Evidence does not include, "well it's really hard to understand." Can you explain how a DVD works? I can't. Does that make gods of the engineers at Sony? How do you think Augustus Caesar would have reacted to seeing a jet plane or a video game console or a digital camera. He might have considered you a god if you busted your iPod all up in his grill. There's no telling how Caesar might have reacted to Amy Grant. But we're not gods; we're just more advanced than he is, and give him 2000 years, and he'll be bustin' System of a Down like any good pagan. Give us another 2000 years and maybe we'll have the whole DNA thing, origin of the universe, and all the rest of it figured out too.
To summarize: Evolution = some evidence. Intelligent Design = romantic but no evidence. People are trying to disprove evolution to try to win a nobel prize, but no one has been able to yet. We're really smart because as a species we've been alive for a long time, and we'll continue getting smarter up until Bush destroys the world. If there is a God, he believes in evolution too. Christian rock is awful. I'd say that's about it...
posted by lifeintheG at 5:10 PM
2 Comments:
Once again, time is limited. But for a quick response...
Neither one of you have come close to describing Intelligent Design. It has nothing to do with Jesus, or God, or god, or any sort of deity. If you've been told that, or believe it, you're grossly misinformed.
Another scolding to MG -
Your research is egregiously slim.
"Evolution = some evidence. Intelligent Design = romantic but no evidence. "
"ID explains away anything that doesn't fit (dinosaur bones) with a lazy excuse (God put them there to fool us)."
ID has a great deal of evidence - all of the evidence, in fact, that Evolution has, because in a great many situations the same things that serve as evidence for Evolution also serve as evidence for ID. They're both systems that include most of the knowledge that we now have about the origins of life. The only quarrel ID has is where Evolution's explanation (chance) differs from their own (designed).
And dinosaur bones fit well within ID's framework. So does an old earth. And Neanderthals, or whatever else you want to add. They're not Creationists.
Post a Comment
<< Home