Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've been quietly following this thread until now. While I'm not too sure about some of MysticPhD's conclusions, one area he seems to have hit the nail on the head is how many of you cling to your views as dogmatically as any Creationist does.
Creationism/ID has NOTHING to base itself upon, nada, not a thing.
Evolution has simply too much data and hard evidence for the rational to overlook.
Intelligent design is not empirically falsifiable. Ergo, it's not a theory. It's an insult to rational inquiry and a cheap veneer for people trying to cloak dogma in sophistication.
Then it isn't an explanation and should not be presented as such. NOTHING is not an explanation. It "just is" is not an explanation. We don't know is the appropriate "explanation." Those who prefer "nothing" as the source can choose that . . . those of us who prefer God as the source can choose that. There is no superiority or basis for denigrating or scoffing at one or the other version.
I agree. "It just is" is withholding an explanation. It is only saying what is evident, which is that 'it is'. Saying there's a conscious 'mover' is baseless, and thus "Intelligent Design" is not a scientific theory.
Quote:
There is no evidence that there isn't . . . since we cannot "measure" the composite energy form that our conscious "Self" takes . . . it is probably non-baryonic. There is no basis for imputing that "nothingness" can produce the universal field that establishes the parameters of our universe and the "forces" within it. However, consciousness requires the existence of a field to contain the composite "Self"making it a superior candidate to "nothingness" for the universal field.
It's all speculation. However, there are a couple problems that I see here. First, it seems that you are implying that this 'universal field' has not always been; that it came out of 'nothingness'.. a claim that cannot be supported.
Second, I don't understand how you drew the conclusion here: "consciousness requires the existence of a field to contain the composite "Self"making it a superior candidate to "nothingness" for the universal field." I don't quite get what you mean by the green part (particularly what 'field' you are referring to), and I don't get what you mean by "nothingness for the universal field" either.
So, are you trying to say that there was a "before the universe" and 'something from nothing' can't happen and so therefore a conscious creator had to have done it? I'm getting the sense of an infinite regression of "god created the universe, so what created god, and what created that, and what created that... ad infinitum"
---
Also, I'm curious about something: do you believe that our autonomic nervous system, which works because of our brain but we do not consciously control it, is controlled by a conscious god? Also, do you believe that every event, say for example a rock rolling down a hill, happens because a conscious god made it happen? Does this hypothetical conscious god micromanage every event?
The thing is some views have evidence to back them up, and some don't....I think I'll stick with the evidence over the god done it thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi
Creationism/ID has NOTHING to base itself upon, nada, not a thing.
Evolution has simply too much data and hard evidence for the rational to overlook.
You two are perfect cases in point, particularly of the stubborn -- dare I say dogmatic -- insistence on conflating ID with creationism and framing it as "my view or the God did it view" no matter how many times it is explained that evolution and ID are not incompatible.
You two are perfect cases in point, particularly of the stubborn -- dare I say dogmatic -- insistence on conflating ID with creationism and framing it as "my view or the God did it view" no matter how many times it is explained that evolution and ID are not incompatible.
You two are perfect cases in point, particularly of the stubborn -- dare I say dogmatic -- insistence on conflating ID with creationism and framing it as "my view or the God did it view" no matter how many times it is explained that evolution and ID are not incompatible.
They are not in the least compatible....There is tons of evidence for evolution and zilch for ID. How many times must this be said before you get it?
I guess I'll try to explain it to you in a language you'll understand: Baaah. Baah baaah. Baaaaaaah.
This only supports the claim that Sanspeur made. You have no evidence or logic to support your claim that evolution and ID are compatible so you resort to ad hominem fallacies, thus proving evolution and ID are incompatible. If they were compatible, then you would be presenting evidence to substantiate that claim.
Very mature of you.....What is that? The Christian sheep bleat?...I've heard it before.
You know nothing about my religious convictions. Suffice to say your assumptions suck, though unsurprising considering the assumption is required in order to cling to your dogmatic view of ID.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agnostic soldier
This only supports the claim that Sanspeur made. You have no evidence or logic to support your claim that evolution and ID are compatible so you resort to ad hominem fallacies, thus proving evolution and ID are incompatible. If they were compatible, then you would be presenting evidence to substantiate that claim.
First, speaking of logical fallacies, a fallacy is not proof of anything other than the use of a fallacy. Second, it has already been explained a thousand times here. Explaining a 1,001st time while you all shout "LA LA LA LA!" with your fingers in your ears is an exercise in futility.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
