Do you believe that if you just make this stuff up and post it enough times, it will become true? I have NEVER ONCE asked you to prove evolution impossible. I defy you to post a link in which I ask that. You claim that ID is a scientifically provable and when asked to produce ONE SHRED of that proof, you run away and hide or post ridiculous evasions like this one. You have shown this personality to be a blatant liar, just like your Z personality. ID fanatic: ID is a scientifically provable theory!! ID critic: Really? Ok, can you provide us with some of that proof or post a link please? ID fanatic: Why don't you prove that ID isn't possible? ID critc: Ummm.... I'm not sure I understand - it is not up to me to prove your theory impossible. You claimed it is provable, I am asking for an example of that proof! You can't say a theory is proved because I can't disprove it!! ID fanatic: The scientific method is brainwashing!!!! ID critic: Errrr... it is? But aren't you actually claiming that ID is a scientifically provable alternative to evolution? ID'er: (threatens anal penetration) ID has nothing to do with the origin of life on earth. It is a political movement whose aim is to reshape Western society in a manner consistent with a narrow radical Christian view of the world. ID'ers do not care that the majority of Westerners do not share these beliefs. When you post as Z, at least you try to cloud the issue with threats of anal penetration if we keep harassing you. I like the Z alias better, it's more entertaining.
please point us towards the theoretical basis / text of ID on evolution, i am curious... as far as we know, there isn't one... therefore in a sense its "not even wrong"... but you seem to know better
i am sorry but, observed by WHO??? i grew up in parts of europe, africa & asia pretty close to the ground and was extremely curious about nature and biology from a young age... i can't recall thinking of it as being designed in any way EVER... can u help me out here... examples? why should we take you on faith, that there MUST be a purpose, design etc?? so far we've got a perfectly sound battle-tested scientific theory that doesn't incorporate any such axiom, thank you very much... next!
like, that the earth is flat, that the sun & the stars revolve around the earth, that the earth is a young 6,000 year-old lass, etc etc... quite a laugh yes... now i've got another one for you straight from the cavemen... nature is designed
The observed fact that systems appear to be designed. The observed fact that systems appear to be designed. The observed fact that systems appear to be designed. The observed fact that systems appear to be designed. AH YES!!! That fact. The FACT that they APPEAR to be designed. Yes, indeed. What a total and utter joke. You can't even call this shoddy reasoning. It is beneath that. That's why I keep suggesting that these people aren't serious when they make posts like this. It is just impossible to believe that anyone could seriously make a statement like this. I beg of you, consider this from ZZZzzzzzzz I asked anyone from either side to come on here and attempt to stand behind this nonsense. No one dared. Just pathetic.
Cap, for the life of me I can't figure out how we would ever go about proving something like that. The problem is that the whole concept of there being an intelligent designer is rooted in faith, not logic or reasoning or empiricism. I hope you will agree with that. See, that's the whole point here. ID is not falsifiable!! That is one of the key arguments we have been trying to make here. How on earth could you ever prove that God doesn't exist? The question is absurd. This is what the ID'ers know - that's why, when the ID'ers say that ID is a scientifically provable theory, and we ask for even one shred of proof, they come back at us with 'Can you prove that ID is false?' They know damn well that can never be proved. We can, however, prove that common table salt is made up of a sodium ion and a chloride ion. Right?
they don't need one... they have robust scientific theories and procedures to demonstrate and experimentally verify that causality breaks down in nature not just at subatomic level but as high up as molecular level... http://elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1275145&highlight=effects#post1275145 complex systems science, nonlinear science, is steadily developing theoretical models of what happens at all other relevant scales, incl species, civilisational etc... http://elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=80437&highlight=complex causality, purpose? think again
i didn't know that religion had any means to explain the unknown??? why shld that be the purpose of religion anyway??? faith is not about fairy tales imo... except for simpletons perhaps a key message of science is that, with the proper approach and keeping an open mindset including challenging current science with equally rigourous science, today's unknowns may not remain unknowns forever...
That's right!! Since ID'ers only rebuttal when we ask them for the proof they promised is 'Can you disprove ID?', we can legitimately claim that IS and the Flying Spaghetti Monsters theories are just as valid. Not to mention my own theory, GC. The Green-Cheesians will not be forgotten!! Similarly, Green-Cheesian theory is rooted in the diametric analysis of conjoined absolutes; the iambic nature of the lunar aspect shows hyper-morbidity in nano-states approaching null. For this reason, it is an inescapable conclusion that Neo-Fromagian reduction is a fait-accompli, and that terran milk-solids are syncretic in the ouvre. Can anyone prove that this is not true?