Duddits Cavell

The remarkable density of canards (e.g., calling ID a theory) and hypocrisy (e.g., the pastor's plea for secularists to quit adding fuel to the religion-vs.-science fire) in the first two letters here almost leads me to believe that they were actually written by sniggering evo-atheist IIDB-ers for the sole purpose of providing other board members opportunities for easy target practice. I am in the middle of moving and am not as epistemologically advanced as some of y'all, so I hope someone will dive in with due righteousness.

IamMoose

I refute this tripe! Refute, refute!

mopc

or rather, they shouldnt

Natural selection is not undirected, it is directed by the laws of nature which some believe were created by WhateverTheyCallIt.


Doubting current theories on evolution is indeed scientific enquiry. ID, however, is closet religion, a bad one for that. It's the first part of the "wedge" that creation loonies are trying too shove into the "tree" of purported "materialism", to slowly destroy it, being that materialism isn't even science any more for we know since Einstein that matter is but a kind of energy.

It is creationism and its disguised form ID that add fuel to the mistake of opposing science to religion. Though many scientists also overinterpret Darwinism to claim that no superior Watchamacallit exists, which is incorrect.

If Gawd created an ordered universe, nothing stops this order to have produced life, however unlikely, in at least one tiny planet. If the universe is all order, therefore Darwinism does not suggest randomness, except that within natural laws.

I wish every Christian held that view. However it is demented religion that distorts things, and the cartoon (which I havent seen) is just mocking that, apparently.

mopc

Indeed they arent as long as you assume that Evolution by Natural Selection of Genetic Traits (a.k.a. NeoDarwinism) is the process by which Intelligent Design works, unaided by extra supernatural gap-filling gobbledygook.

It is. Intelligent Design isn't even a theory, just the belief that Evolution is impossible and that Elohim grabbed those aminoacids and put life in its different species together in his lab and then released into the world. Show me the lab, and I'll call it a theory.

To call for a supernatural gap-filler and then say it's a scientific position is indeed as laughable as saying that just because we don't yet fully understand gravity, Zeus is the one jiggling the planets around - for "how can Earth revolve so perfectly around the Sun? Random, chaotic forces called "gravity"? There is no proof that the "graviton" exists, gravity hasn't been verified in a lab, or reproduced, thus we must assume Intelligent Gravitation".

Some people do worship a certain kind of scientific theory as a dogma and use it as an ideological tool. Darwinism certainly hasn't been an exception. But that does not make Darwinism false - it is a very good Law, generally proven beyound doubt. Mocking "Creationism/ID theories" is however not unfair, because these positions exist ONLY as dogma worshipped at an altar. No good theory behind.

What the hell? Well, anyway saying that a theory doesnt explain everything and therefore it must be replaced by Merlin the Magician is mere gap-filling. And reproduction does produce certain "random" mutations in offspring, within limits, and those mutations are than passed on if suitable or die off if unsuitable, with some stages in between of relative success. And this limit to randomness in offspring alteration is a product of natural selection itself, which would select to extinction any individuals who produced any insanely mutated offspring.


Indeed, even though possible for an omnipotent Wicked Witch of the East, who could have created everything like the Bible says and then implanted a fake past to laugh at us.

Very bad sintax there. But I get it - just like life, language has built-in redundancy resulted from evolution! "Virtually impossible" indeed, but given gazillions of planets in googlillions of galaxies in 13 billion years, the virtually impossible becomes almost likely, at least on one planet.

No. Show me two Saturn Vs having a hot night of lushious sex at the Smithsonian and getting a baby Command Module and I change my mind.


Then unfortunately the best of this guy's knowledge is a piece of crap.

Then Biblical literalism and so many forms of religion should be banned from earh right now!!! Not Evolution by Natural Selection of Genetic Traits, which is proven beyond doubt. And even if wrong, we should search another theory not pseudo-theories like "ID" and let alone "Creationism".

"Intelligent" Design for instance.

Whereas some advocates of Neo-Darwinism do act like religious fanatics, that doesn't mean that the theory itself is demented dogma, just that it has been distorted by flawed humans like we all are. ID and Creationim, on the other hand, are only dogma, not a distortion of a good theory.

Therefore I agree with the author and say that ID and Creationism, which are virtually the same dementia, and 100% non-scientific for they theorize about nothing, are dangerous and should be not banned but explained and only then discarded.

I am in favor of teaching Creationism at school, as people now even here in Brazil are proposing, as long as the truth about its logical fallacies is explained. By not touching the subject, education leaves it to religious people, who sometimes are well-meaning and good, but wrong and biased.

josephpalazzo

Shucks, and I thought that ID stood for Intelligent Dummying... go figure.

The Bible Thumper

I need a handful of Excedrin after trying to read this...

The Bible Thumper

Lol, too funny, moderator...