Intelligent design not so intellignt.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Free Thinker, May 14, 2010.

  1. its all in the video by the cell biologist i posted. knowledge never hurts you. give it a try.
     
    #11     May 14, 2010
  2. Ricter

    Ricter

    Not agreeing or disagreeing, but on the philosophic level who says death is bad? I mean, we think death is bad, but we could as well consider it no more than transformation, as some traditions do...

    So, if death isn't (necessarily) bad, then those mutations do not support bad design.
     
    #12     May 14, 2010
  3. there are things worse than death. horrible genetic defects in newborn babies come to mind.
     
    #13     May 14, 2010
  4. Ricter

    Ricter

    Agreed, but still that's on an "earthly" level. From another pov, this is all just a vale of tears, our lives but brief sparks from an eternal fire. And that's kinda the point of religion, the transcendent feeling, and imagination.
     
    #14     May 14, 2010
  5. If you've read any of his books, you'd know that he then goes on to prove why complex biology gives the appearance of design, but is in fact not design. Natural selection.
     
    #15     May 14, 2010
  6. can you think of any reason a self described loving god would design suffering of newborn babies into his perfect design?
     
    #16     May 14, 2010
  7. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    Neither is your obsession with all things anti religious.
    (My spell checker indicates you misspelled intelligent, genius)
    :D


    BTW how many converts to, whatever you are, have you counted since your campaign to educate the uneducated began?
     
    #17     May 14, 2010
  8. Wallet

    Wallet

    Millers explanation of irreducible complexity is flawed imho. In all things we find ourselves digging deeper or smaller into the material of matter, when we look at the cell, now we realize the complexity of it's inner workings, Miller addresses this as breaking the flagellum into smaller but identifiable parts thus possibly proving evolution.

    How ever when taking those parts to the next level we find our selves looking at the basic bio-building blocks being assembled. To me this is outside the possibility of chance

    Again, the complexity of the body, at every level, all biology down to the most basic level/quantum, screams design.


    An Atheist who disagrees with a Christian (?) who disagrees with Creationism.

    Why I disagree with Ken Miller, by Massimo Pigliucci

    http://www.scientificblogging.com/rationally_speaking/why_i_disagree_ken_miller
     
    #18     May 14, 2010
  9. Ricter

    Ricter

    I'd have to consider that the designer's (if there is one) notion of loving might be far beyond what I think loving is, particularly since the designer appears to be working at a "divine" level, from my pov. Then I might have to consider the possibility that the suffering is, from that pov, neither ultimate or eternal and could well be akin to "ripping a bandage off". This "god" feeling is a feeling billions have, so it's not likely going away.
     
    #19     May 14, 2010
  10. are you anti education?


    "The masses have never thirsted after truth...Whoever can supply them with illusions is easily their master; whoever attempts to destroy their illusions is always their victim."
    - Gustave Le Bon
     
    #20     May 14, 2010