Is there actual scientific evidence to support Intelligent Design "theory?"

Sorry, but you have made a fundamental error here. You have assumed an honest creationist. Few if any exist. The ordinary dishonest kind points to lots of things that aren't evidence, and calls them evidence. You really need to understand that to the creationist, "evidence" is anything they can dream up to support their delusions. No requirement that it has to be real, of course. And conversely, anything refuting their delusions cannot be evidence.

You're right that there's no evidence of the sort of intelligent design (that is, creationism) they wish to believe. But their ability to lie to themselves is bottomless. As Richard Dawkins observed, "there is no sensible limit to what the human mind is capable of believing, against any amount of contrary evidence."

 

Oh....I am aware of what would seem to be an obvious error on my part.

But I can't resist posting a fact that will result in the posting of so many other things that are not.

AboveAlpha

 

As I mentioned elsewhere, the detection of an honest creationist would be suggestive of an actual miracle.

 

I posted this challenge at the 3:36 PM est time code and I STILL have not had a single post in response.

"There does NOT exist a single tiny bit of empirical evidence that would support Intelligent Design.

Anyone that states there is....please post such data.

I know they cannot.....as one cannot post what does not exist.".....end quote AboveAlpha

Funny huh?

AboveAlpha

 

Here is something I think is as perceptive yet straightforward as anything:

http://www.textbookleague.org/65bama.htm

 

Fortunately for all of us....the Creationist/Fundamentalist Movement is like a very large boulder that is square and is trying all on it's own to roll uphill.

It is DYING A VERY QUICK DEATH!!!

So quick in fact that those who still are a part of such a Movement are in a state of panic as they realize that the people of the Modern World will no longer believe in their PAGAN MON-THEISTIC CONCEPTS AND DOGMA.

PAGANS!!! Every single one of them.

AboveAlpha

 

Don't I wish. But half of all Americans still think man was poofed into existence recently, far fewer than half of American public schools even teach evolution, and the position of high school science teacher is seen by creationists as a missionary position -- an estimated 20% of them are creationists. The Dishonesty Institute spends over $4 million a year getting creationists elected to key school boards across the country, in Kansas, Texas, Ohio and elsewhere. Even those who are indifferent to the battle and figure the scientists know what they're talking about, rarely know what evolution even IS. And most of them think it's the claim that the Christian god doesn't exist somhow.

Plenty of news to keep up with here:

http://ncse.com/

 

TRUST ME.....it used to be a lot worse!!!

AboveAlpha

 

False dichotomy. Had it been proposed in Newton's day that radiant heat and visible light were made of the same stuff, that would have been neither a testable hypothesis nor an excuse, but a fact - just like intelligent design.

Obviously it's observed all the time. Certainly it has never been understood by scientists; but we may rest assured that the last place such understanding will be found is in dogmatic atheists, who are determined to reduce every observable phenomenon to an algorithm, which for them is a substitute that is not merely acceptable, but preferable to understanding - which is their enemy, as their heart's desire is to stand over everything.

 

No, if it cannot be tested, it is not a hypothesis, it is a speculation at best. This doesn't mean it's WRONG, you understand. Just that it can't be tested. And your example was testable in principle, but they lacked the technology to do so. Intelligent design is not testable in principle. There is no possible test that could show that ID is incorrect.

THIS is why you get no scientific respect.

Evidence matters. This is what separates science from woo. If you think evidence is an atheistic conspiracy, you will never understand anything.

 

Yes.

Your reading comprehension leaves more than a little to be desired.

Which has nothing to do with its truth value, of course, so all you're really doing here is bearing witness to your twisted sense of priorities.

But of course Newton's contemporaries had no way of knowing that, so if they had thought like you, they'd have written it off as "mere speculation", even though it was true.

The same can be said of any self-evident truth, so I don't know what point you think you're making.

Then obviously I'm better off without it.

Obviously you didn't understand a word I said...

...and as long as you are content to let the voices in your head twist the words of others into something you can find fault with, you'll never understand anything I say - or, for that matter, anything of any substance.

 

Because you can't understand what you read?

Your reading comprehension needs work. Untestable claims CAN be true, but how would we know? We can't test them.

But if you read the history, you will see that they did not. At first, they had no way to test, but Newton's ideas were testable in principle. Einstein was in the same position - his theories looked good but could not be tested. Parts of them are STILL not tested. But gradually, with the development of both the theory and the technology, tests have been devised and these ideas mostly passed the tests. You are perhaps aware that Mercury's orbit, once telescopes were good enough to notice, did NOT agree with Newton. That's what testing is for.

All self-evident truths can be tested. If this were not so, they would not be self-evident. ID proponent Michael Behe admitted, under oath on the witness stand, that "intelligent design" was self-evident ONLY to those of a narrow religious sect who already believed it. When asked how a non-believer could detect or measure design, he had no suggestions. Which is one of the main reasons the judge said that ID is not science.

Why? This sounds like sour grapes. Rather than get an education and earn respect, you just say "aw, who needs respect anyway?" Do you think this fools anyone besides yourself?

Because you feel evidence does not matter. I understood that. I laughed at you. I'm still laughing at you. If you should ever happen to learn anything, you will discover that the world you live in is MUCH richer and more rewarding than you could have dreamed.

 

Please, the perceptual deficiency, contrived or otherwise, is entirely on your end.

Doesn't matter. What matters is their truth value.

Then they didn't think like you.

That may be, but obviously there is no way a self-evident truth can be tested and found to be incorrect.

Clearly you don't understand the concept of self-evident truth.

I couldn't care less.

Because to get it I'd have to emulate Winston Smith, and profess to not see what I see.

How it sounds to people like you is no concern of mine.

You understood nothing.

I don't doubt it...but sooner or later, on one side of the grave or the other, the hollowness of your laughter will begin to impress itself upon you, trust me.

 

But how do you KNOW something is true, if there is no way to test it?

On the contrary, they thought exactly like me. They realized that these ideas needed to be tested, and they set out to test them to the best of their ability. They didn't just say "Newton is a great guy, so he must be right." And as I pointed out (and you ignored), some of Newton's claims FAILED the tests. So it's a good thing they were tested, right?

Sorry, happens all the time. Here's an example from scientific history. It was self-evident to everyone that heavy objects must fall faster than lighter objects. But eventually, someone put this self-evident truth to the test, and if FAILED. It turns out weight doesn't matter, and everything falls at the same rate. Since that time, a very large number of self-evident "truths" have turned out to be wrong.

Your concept seems to be, something so obviously true that there's no need to test it at all. Like heavier objects falling faster.

Of course not. He refuted your claims under oath. And he is an ID proponent!

 

Anyone who doesn't know without testing that it's wrong to kill a child just to watch it die, doesn't know anything worth knowing.

You've provided no reason to think so.

It can't happen ever, obviously, since anything proven to be incorrect was never true in the first place.

No it was not, and that you think so serves only to accentuate the fact that you have no idea what the hell you're talking about.

That anyone has contradicted my claims (charitably assuming you haven't distorted this man's testimony to suit your nefarious ends) is of no particular interest on its face, and you've provided zero evidence of any refutation.

So?

 

The only evidence of ID is the intelligence seen all around you. OTOH there are a lot of stupid designs out there to even it all out. Of course I can't prove it. I can't prove that what I see exists either. I think therefore I am? I wonder if rocks think....

- - - Updated - - -

The only evidence of ID is the intelligence seen all around you. OTOH there are a lot of stupid designs out there to even it all out. Of course I can't prove it. I can't prove that what I see exists either. I think therefore I am? I wonder if rocks think....

 

You are talking about moral postulates, and I'm talking about scientific knowledge.

You carefully cut and removed my explanation. Put it back, and POOF your claim is falsified!

But you didn't say that true things are always true, you spoke of self-evidently true claims. What's true is not always sel-evident, and what's self-evident is not always true.

<misunderstandings clarified, lies omitted>

 

I will post this challenge again as some here have PURPOSELY avoided this challenge so they can continue to post about I.D. as being somehow a reality when IT IS NOT!

There does NOT exist a single tiny bit of empirical evidence that would support Intelligent Design.

Anyone that states there is....please post such data.

I know they cannot.....as one cannot post what does not exist.

AboveAlpha

 

(...crickets chirping......tumble weeds rolling through.....)

 

Exactly WHAT intelligence seen all around us are you talking about and how could any detectable intelligence be considered evidence....and evidence of WHAT exactly?

AboveAlpha

- - - Updated - - -

EXACTLY!!!!

EVERY SINGLE TIME....I place this challenge it is NOT replied to.

Reason why?

No evidence exists.

AboveAlpha

 

Completely hollow claims.

 

Wasn't Dr. Michael Behe who had to admit in court that ID was as valid and as much of a Science as Astrology?

 

Actually....I think ASTROLOGY just might be a bit more scientific compared to Intelligent Design.

Anyone here who enjoys a GOOD LAUGH....read the Intelligent Design book...Of People and Pandas.

It is funnier than any Book of Jokes or Comedy than a person will EVER read! LOL!!!!

The thing is....I could have written a book on Intelligent Design that would have actually been ACCEPTABLE to teach in Public Schools.

The way I would do it would be to write that although it cannot be proven...IT IS POSSIBLE....that IF a GOD exists...such a GOD could have used both Quantum Evolution and Biological Evolution to create the Universe and all life within.

THAT....is a book that Public Schools would NOT have an issue having in schools....as since it cannot be conclusively prove either way whether a GOD does or does not exist.....such a BOOK would state this but also state a persons FAITH determines whether or not they believe such a construction via Quantum and Biological Evolution of the Universe and all life within it is something that person believes was done by a GOD or NOT.....but THIS is how the Universe and all Life within it and how Earth and all life within it was created or developed.

And you know what....I hardly think ANYONE would have an issue with that book from a Scientific, Religious and Political viewpoint as NOTHING written in such a book would state something that was false.

AboveAlpha

 

they are like a kid showing up to the sandlot baseball game with a football...wanting them to change the rules of the game so they can play using the football.

 

THIS....is what I can't understand.

They had a CHANCE....to actually get themselves on the Scientific Ground Level if they had modeled Intelligent Design in the manner I detailed out how Intelligent Design SHOULD have been detailed as a Hypothesis in post 323 of this topic.

This is very much like the way the Vatican has detailed out Creationism by a GOD using both Quantum and Biological Evolution and just about every major Christian Sect also details out Creationism in this manner as well.

As Pope John Paul II knew and most Protestant Christian sect leaders KNEW....there existed and still exists OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE in the forms of PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS which at that point when a Practical App. can be created and used then a THEORY is no longer a THEORY but becomes a FACT....they all KNEW that they had either get ahead of the curve such as Pope John Paul II did in the 1980's and as the rest of the Christian Leadership did in the late 80's to 90's....and tell their Faithful the realities....or risk becoming irrelevant and appearing too backward to the Faithful.

THEN....a bunch of COMPLETE IDIOTS came along and wrote the books on Intelligent Design and as most people know these books are banned from being taught in BOTH Public and Private Schools as even Christian Leaders realize the complete level of idiocy and out right LIES that were used to write and create such books.

But...they had a CHANCE....to make the words Intelligent Design actually mean something that had a basis in LOGIC and could not be conclusively dis-proven by Probability, Science, Genetics, Physics...and hey let's face it....if I can remember although I might be wrong so if anyone knows post to me....I think that the writers of Of People and Pandas did not even know a Panda was NOT A SPECIES OF BEAR....as Pandas are more closely related to an Opossum and are NOT BEARS.

I could go on all day talking about the IDIOCY of those who both wrote the Intelligent Design Books and those who were so stupid enough to actually think those books which are now thankfully BANNED from being taught in any accredited schools....well...such idiocy does not even deserve my attention....EXCEPT as a way to get a GOOD LAUGH!! LOL!!!

AboveAlpha