Intelligent Design is not creationism

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Teleologist, Nov 4, 2006.

  1. Stu wrote:
    You're misunderstanding what I'm saying. ID is similar to SETI. SETI is a search for man-made-like objects found in places where man could never have made them. An example of such an object is a narrowband radio signal like those generated by man's radio transmitters but coming from another planet. So far as I know, the serious SETI people are not attempting to detect a god or some alien creature wildly different from man.

    The ID approach is similar. But instead of radio technology, we're dealing with biotechnology/nanotechnology.
     
    #1091     Dec 12, 2006
  2. You're joking, right? This guy can't be serious. I'm having a hard time controlling my laugh.

    SETI is an acronym. Do you know how to spell it out?

    Do you know what biotechnology is? Do you know what nanotechnology is? Why do any of these have anything to do with the origin of life?
     
    #1092     Dec 12, 2006
  3. stu

    stu

    ...am I ?
    ID = Intelligent Designer(s) Something / someone intelligent -which created everything In other words God in ET's clothing.
    SETI = search for extra-terrestrial intelligence. No mention of (God) designers or creators.
     
    #1093     Dec 12, 2006
  4. ID has nothing to do with God.
     
    #1094     Dec 12, 2006
  5. stu

    stu

    then it is nothing that isn't already being done a lot more reliably by science. Or alternatively, is ID some kind of art form?
     
    #1095     Dec 12, 2006
  6. Once again. The hypothetical example of a Mount Rushmore-like structure being found on Mars is provided solely to refute the claim of ID critics that a design inference is thwarted by infinite regress or failing to identify the designer. The example of SETI works as well. Are the ID critics claiming that a signal from space consisting of a long series of consecutive prime numbers would fail to count as evidence of intelligent design because the identity of the sender was unknown?
     
    #1096     Dec 12, 2006
  7. Same old argument, "if we can't measure it, if we can't comprehend it, it doesn't exist..."

    So sayeth the non ID ostrich, who thinks his head in the sand produced darkness vanquishes the enemy.

     
    #1097     Dec 12, 2006
  8. stu declares himself the "winner" by telling jem he is the "loser."

    Same old stu, assuming first in circular logic fashion to reach his conclusions...

    Yep stuey, you are always good for a laugh!

    LOL!


     
    #1098     Dec 12, 2006
  9. James Bond:
    I suspect that if scientists succeed in creating life from non-life they will accomplish it through bioengineering and/or nanotechnology. Likewise for seeding other planets with life. If this is a possible future then I see no reason this couldn't have been how life began on earth.
     
    #1099     Dec 12, 2006
  10. What happened to your snowflake "self?" Did it change into H2O without a command from God?
     
    #1100     Dec 12, 2006