View Poll Results: Is intelligent Design a scientific theory?

Voters
69. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    3 4.35%
  • no

    66 95.65%
Page 21 of 21 FirstFirst ... 11192021
Results 201 to 206 of 206

Thread: Is intelligent Design a scientific theory?

  1. #201
    Sage
    Quag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,982

    Re: Is intelligent Design a scientific theory?

    Then it's a question without meaning. To ask what "simply is", without referring to the simplicity of the matter, is questioning the existence of the object, or maybe even suggesting that it exists without reason. Neither of which make any sense at all, and have no place in an intellectual debate. Though maybe I'm mistaken and this wasn't an intellectual debate at all.
    I agree the question was poorly worded. But that is neither of our faults. I figured they weren`t asking it right but you can`t blame tecoyah for answering the question as put.


    You are attempting to save face for placing frore us a question that even you feel the need to clarify...attacking others for your own failure to communicate makes you seem a bit ignorant.

    But, now that you have moved you goalposts, I will kick again:
    I don`t think there is anything wrong with rephrasing it to make it more clear, or with your original answer. No need for anyone ot get uppity about it. Though I still don`t think he has worded it in anyway that makes your answer invalid.

    Better yet can someone explain what this question has to do with the subject at hand? Seems to be going off on an obscure tangent of minutia.
    Last edited by Quag; 04-29-12 at 06:06 PM.
    A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
    Winston Churchill



    A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.
    Winston Churchill

  2. #202
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: Is intelligent Design a scientific theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by tecoyah View Post
    You are attempting to save face for placing frore us a question that even you feel the need to clarify...attacking others for your own failure to communicate makes you seem a bit ignorant.

    But, now that you have moved you goalposts, I will kick again:


    Concepts that simply are;

    Gravity
    Astrophysics
    Metabolism
    Mathematics
    Photosynthesis
    Humor
    Desire

    None are simple, but they simply are.
    First off you take this alot more serious than I do if you think someone should attempt to "save face" in here. I am by definition faceless, this is all about exchange of ideas and nothing else, we are all annonymous in this forum. My attempt to clarify my original remark was simply that, an attempt to clarify what I thought was obvious. I was referring to things like Darwinism which was the subject, not things like tequila, I just assumed you got that, my mistake. Your revised list still shows you cant refute my original statement. As for dismissing some smart ass punk with nothing to add to the conversation that was my mistake too, as a rule I just ignore idiots like that but sometimes I let one annoy me and give them the attention they are begging for. I have never had a productive conversation with you yet but I thought this may be the first time, you started out OK then went south on me, oh well.

  3. #203
    Gone

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-16-16 @ 03:15 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    8,585

    Re: Is intelligent Design a scientific theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    First off you take this alot more serious than I do if you think someone should attempt to "save face" in here. I am by definition faceless, this is all about exchange of ideas and nothing else, we are all annonymous in this forum. My attempt to clarify my original remark was simply that, an attempt to clarify what I thought was obvious. I was referring to things like Darwinism which was the subject, not things like tequila, I just assumed you got that, my mistake. Your revised list still shows you cant refute my original statement. As for dismissing some smart ass punk with nothing to add to the conversation that was my mistake too, as a rule I just ignore idiots like that but sometimes I let one annoy me and give them the attention they are begging for. I have never had a productive conversation with you yet but I thought this may be the first time, you started out OK then went south on me, oh well.
    I suppose then, there is no further point.

    So be it.

  4. #204
    onomatopoeic
    mbig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-17 @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,350

    Re: Is intelligent Design a scientific theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    I tried to read Of Pandas and People a while back, and it was filled with misrepresentations, false assumptions, and a complete misunderstanding of both the fundamental tenets of science, and for established scientific theories (other than evolution, I mean). I have searched far and wide for any real scientific data put forth by ID supporters in its favor. I have thus far found none. I beseech anyone in this thread who supports ID to provide some.
    Intelligent Design is just respun creationism, Respun for legal reasons by creationists, and of course necessarily has a designER/god.

    Quote Originally Posted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design
    Intelligent design is the assertion 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 modern Form of the traditional teleological argument for the existence of God, but one which Avoids specifying the nature or identity of the designer.[3] The idea was developed by a group of American creationists who Reformulated their argument in the creation–evolution controversy to Circumvent court rulings that prohibit the teaching of creationism as science.[4][5][6] Intelligent design's leading proponents – all of whom are associated with the Discovery Institute, a politically conservative think tank[7][8] – believe the designer to be the God of Christianity.[9][10]

    Advocates of intelligent design seek to fundamentally Redefine Science to accept Supernatural explanations,[11] arguing that intelligent design is a scientific theory under this new definition of science.[12]
    The Unequivocal consensus in the scientific community is that intelligent design is NOT science.[13][14][15][16]
    The U.S. National Academy of Sciences has stated that "creationism, intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are NOT science because they are not testable by the methods of science."[17] The U.S. National Science Teachers Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have termed it Pseudoscience.[18] Others in the scientific community have concurred, and some have called it Junk science.[19][20]......"
    Overview
    The term "intelligent design" came into use after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the 1987 case of Edwards v. Aguillard that to require the teaching of "creation science" alongside evolution was a violation of the Establishment Clause, which prohibits state endorsement of a religion. In the Edwards case, the Supreme Court had also held that "teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to school children might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction".[24] In drafts of the creation science textbook 'Of Pandas and People', almost all derivatives of the word "Creation", such as "Creationism", were Replaced with the words "intelligent design".[21] The book was published in 1989, followed by a "grass-roots" campaign promoting the use of the book to teach intelligent design in high-school biology classes.[25]....."
    Last edited by mbig; 04-29-12 at 11:44 PM.
    I'm personally sick of not being able to dunk a basketball because of racism.
    anon

  5. #205
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,951

    Re: Is intelligent Design a scientific theory?

    Intelligent design is a theory, but not necessarily testable, we speculate that there was a creator based on evidence. Likewise, abiogenesis is such the same. We can't prove that it happened nor can we provide a viable mechanism behind it. Science can test to see biomolecule formation in a supposed early earth environment, but even if biomolecules are randomly synthesized this does not prove that they were synthesized or that life arose in this type of fashion. Both are speculations based on evidence and largely reinforced by a person's own worldview.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  6. #206
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,857
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is intelligent Design a scientific theory?

    Not enough poll options.

    Intelligent design has many aspects all depending on who you talk to. For some intelligent design means a deity made everything, for others it was trans-dimensional beings who made this universe, and still others just regulate it to highly advanced aliens (from this universe just so you're not confused between this and the afore mentioned trans-dimensional beings) that just made humans.

    Depending on which definition of "scientific theory" you use at least a couple of these things could be considered as such. At least if you use the loosest definition of it. Going strictly by what "scientific theory" means via actual real hard science then no, it is not a scientific theory. At best it would be a hypothesis. It would only become a theory if we found evidence of some form of life that would have been capable of such a feat. And right now we don't even have evidence of basic microbial life outside of our planet...much less intelligent life.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

Page 21 of 21 FirstFirst ... 11192021

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •