Evolution vs. Intelligent Design

Evolution is not random.

Next.

 

the people who came up with intelligent design are the same people who started creationism...creationism morphed into intelligent design in an attempt to have accepted as science in schools...they are the same thing...

- - - Updated - - -

can you elaborate on that for me, please?

 

For those who deny that creationism and ID are one and the same could you please tell me what the different entities were that you would credit with creation vs. who you would credit with intelligent design?

From a purely logical viewpoint I could see an intelligent designer in the form of an ultra advanced computerized mechanism that resulted from a temporal paradox. Or more simply man, or some other species, advances scientifically to the point where we or they create the universe our/themselves.

Kind of like in the Planet of the Apes series when the parent apes from the future bring their child with advanced intelligence back to Earth circa 1970's where he is raised by a circus ape and eventually leads apes in a revolt against the humans resulting in the devolution of mankind while the apes take over.

But I really don't think that's the kind of intelligent design the religious types are trying to push.

And then returning to the original question what possible use is intelligent design and why should anyone teach it as being equal to evolution which has proven itself through the development of vaccines and other medical advances?

 

Evolution is natural selection expressed over a period of time. Natural selection is driven by local environmental factors that are not random. A desert will be hot and dry. A jungle will be hot and humid. And so on. Organisms adopt to their environments, changes/mutations to organism may be random, however the propagation and survival of those species is not random. Adaptation can be predictable, random events are not. If evolution were random we would see tree frogs in the Antarctic and polar bears in the Amazon. Instead we see organisms adapted for their environment.

Evolution is not a difficult concept, those who oppose it are either lieing or ignorant. I wonder which one fits Blackrook?

 

I find it amusing that they do not address the fact the ID movement originated from creationist text books, books that replaced the word god for "designer".

How dishonest can a person be and still respect their own credibility?

 

If a person does not understand a simple concept, it may be that they lack the intelligence to do so.

Or, their mental processes may be so disturbed that they cannot allow themselves to understand something.

Let us assume mental competence.

Ignorance then is a matter of choice. Its deliberate.

 

Information is free. There is no excuse.

 

If a person is mentally incompetent you cant really say they are being negligent.

For the creos capable of posting here it is deliberate negligence.

 

I think everyone here is mentally competent enough to be the target of criticism.

 

The ability to think and to question is beaten out of the children of the very religious at a VERY early age. And every idea that they come across in life thereafter must pass through a mental filter where faith is the end all and be all of everything. It is, in every sense of the term, "brain damage".

 

Whether someone believes in Creationism, Intelligent Design or Theology Evolution, it is their 1st Amendment Right to believe as they wish. Anyone who mocks them for their beliefs betrays the bigotry which poisons their own minds. What right do you have to tell them how they are to believe, in the faith of their choice, or how they may practice their faith or pass their beliefs on to their children?

I think those who believe in the Big Bang Theory are themselves believers in a Creator, and they don't even realize it.

Look at the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution, and then go read Genesis. Now tell me how is it that someone 4,000 years ago would come to the same Creation story as scientists 4,000 years later?

 

I can see how someone with an agenda could twist that story around the way you claim. But if you believe the Bible to be the word of god it should be SMARTER than the best scientists can offer now. We should be discovering that there were secrets hidden in it. And there are NONE. Never once has a legitimate scientist made a discovery and said, "Wow! That's what it meant in Genesis where it says..."

As for your other remarks the reason that this country is so completely screwed up is that the vote of the dumbest & the worst cancels out the vote of the brightest and the best. And there are a LOT of REALLY stupid people in this country. People have the right to believe any stupid thing they want. They DON'T have a right to have their stupid opinions respected.

 

Twist it, eh? In the beginning the Earth was a formless void. According to Astrophysicists there was nothing. Then God said, "Let there be light". And the astrophysicists said then from nothing the universe sprang forth. Now they have no idea how, or why. They have no scientific explanation for it. They just know for a fact that it happened. They believe in God in other words.

And with evolution. How did those guys know that life came from the seas first? That the plants came before the sea creatures and they before the animals that walk and crawl upon the Earth? Lastly, Man was created. Hmmm. Just like in Darwinism. Must be a coincidence.

Would liberals prefer to go back to the days of literacy tests? That wouldn't surprise me because that was the old policy of the democratic party to suppress the Black vote. And would you say that people who believe in God believe that abortion is a sin, as is homosexuality, sexual promiscuity, are dumb and that people who are smart believe in abortion, homosexuality and sexually liberation are the smart ones? People of high morals are dumb and low morals are smart? You have a right to not believe as they do, but as an American, you should respect their right to believe as they wish.

 

What right do they have?
Why, check your post!
That would also be the First Amendment!
They can say anything they like about your beliefs.
Wow! Ain't that America!

 

Like I said: TWISTED!

 

I didn't say that bigots don't have 1st Amendment rights, just that their comments are admissions of bigotry and that they have no right to tell others what they may or may not believe. Why don't you read the paragraph again so that you might then comprehend its meaning.

 

I did.
The First Amendment gives them the right to tell others anything they like. What is confusing about that?
You didn't say they didn't have the right to enforce their beliefs on you.
They don't.
You said they don't have the right to tell you.
They do.

 

Um no. I have the right to questions any belief I like. I have a right to be critical of anything I wish. If someone does not like that, they can (*)(*)(*)(*) off.

Genesis is out of order. Please do not make a silly claim that likens Genesis to cosmic inflation.

 

You must have done poorly in reading comprehension. Perhaps if you read the paragraph a third time you might get it.

 

Help me then.
What do you think you said?

 

You seem to have the same reading comprehension trouble as thebrucebeat.

What part of Genesis is "out of order"?

How is in the beginning there was nothing then God said, "Let there be light" differ from the Big Bang's cosmic expansion theory?

 

This is what I said:

The first Amendment guaranties freedom of religion.

You have a first amendment right to express your bigotry.

You do not have the right to tell others what they may believe, how to practice their beliefs, what faith they are allowed to choose.

I don't understand why it is now fashionable to be prideful and even boastful about being a bigot. It used to be frowned upon.

 

Still waiting to learn from you.
How was my reading comprehension challenged.
"What right do you have to tell them how to believe..."
First Amendment rights.
Am I wrong, Patriot?

 

The earth existed before light, birds before land animals, water before dry land, the flat earth, "firmament", I suggest actually reading Genesis (both contradictory accounts, Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 2:24) before twisting it to fit modern science. Which Genesis account is more correct, Genesis 1:1 or 2:24? Why would Genesis contradict itself?

Genesis is out of order, contradicts itself, and it is safe to dismiss it as nonsense.

 

Sure I have that right. Don't be silly. You have the right to say I don't, but I can't be found in violation of any law if I say you you don't have that right.
Speech is protected, my ironically named friend.
One of the great values of the First Amendment is it protects speech that some find offensive. Speech that doesn't challenge has no need of protection. Who would challenge it in the first place?
Another benefit of it is it allows us to identify the crazies.
Aren't you glad you know about Westboro Baptist Church?