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.
Congratulations Campbell, once again you have hi jacked a thread and taken it completely off topic.
I see several problems with the intelligent design argument...
1- It is not testable or falsifiable.
2 - Many imperfect adaptations found in nature refute the hypothesis of intelligent design.
3 - Intelligent design fails the biochemistry test.
4 - Evolutionary mechanisms give rise to basic structural differences. ID would be static and never change.
5 - Intelligent design is about politics and religion, not science. It is nothing more than an attempt to have creation and religion taught in schools.
evolution fails on each and every freaking planet in our solar system BUT the earth. how is that?
One: You know this how again?
Two: Evolution explains the diversification of life that already exists. Within our solar system, so far, we have not found other life forms. Yet. If that does turn out to be true, then of course Evolution would only apply here, silly!
(Oh....no..... wait.... surely you're not trying to counter Evolution as an explanation of the Origins of Life, are you? That's so lame now that it just reeks like road kill on a sunny afternoon! Read, baket, read! And learn.)
___________________________
BTW, a quick but accurate logic refresher from Wiki about ID and Evolution, from our charming intellectual superior, Richard Dawkins:
After arguing that evolution is easily capable of explaining the origin of complexity, in fact it logically leads to complexity when life's demands are used to test mutation, Dawkins uses this to argue against the existence of God "a deity capable of engineering all the organized complexity in the world, either instantaneously or by guiding evolution, ... must already have been vastly complex in the first place ..." He calls this "postulating organized complexity without offering an explanation."
Dawkins wishes "to persuade the reader, not just that the Darwinian world-view happens to be true, but that it is the only known theory that could, in principle, solve the mystery of our existence."
To which I"ll add: If we add in the observation that the universe is far from complete right now, and that lots of formative events we reliably PREDICT should happen in a universe of constant inorganic evolution, and are now being seen and documented (Hubble telescope, etc.), then the concept of a long-ago completed universe, finalized by an implausibly complex and capable God-figure, is completely unappealing to the rational thinker.
hahahah. how convenient that evolution only applies where?! pleaase. well what else does evolution proves, BUT the Origins of Life? sillier. what happen to natural selection? what happen to survival of the fittest? surely, those should also apply to the entire solar system, not just the earth. not even an alien plant evolve in mars? or venus? the planet that was studied by science and believed to have the closest elements like earth's to cultivate life.
if it was proven that natural selection and survival of the fittest did not apply to other planets especially the neighboring venus and mars, is it safe to say evolution is NOT fool proof.
Being kinder than I should be, I'll just add before signing off tonight: your continually demonstrated ignorance of this topic is appalling, baket. Never said that evolution is conveniently only operating here on Earth. Just that it takes LIFE for LIFE to evolve. At present, we have found no other life in this solar system, tho' as I pointed out yesterday, we've already found 400+ potentially Earth-like and potentially life-supporting exo-planets out there, and that's only taken us 1.5 years.
Pretty early in the study, wouldn't you day? So... You want to bet, say, $1M US$ that we'll NEVER find life anywhere else in the universe? C'mon: put your money where your scientifically illiterate mouth is!
By your faulty logic, since there's no Toyota Motor Company on Mars or Jupiter, I guess that means they don't exist here either, huh?
Life has to exist first, silly fellow, before it can evolve into different forms.
Again, since you simply won't bother to open a book, I'll tell you that Evolution as we, not you, define it, only explains how various new, diverse life forms "evolve" from their already living predecessors.
Sorry; Evolution does not explain anything else. No "formation of life out of inorganic chemicals". No "life arising out of primordial swamp ooz". That's ABIOGENESIS, NOT Evolution.
For heaven/s sake, how do you get along in life. Oh I forgot, You did confess yesterday that you had problems with relationships. My boy: some free advice from your elder and superior: If you won't bother to learn the rules of such interactions, such as knowing what the topic is actually about, you'll never "evolve" as a functioning person.
Now go up to your room and think it over. No TV for you tonight!
C'mon! We luv yah, son! Your mother and I only want what's best for you!
evolution FAILS on each and every freaking planet in our solar system BUT the earth. how is that?
For the very freakish reason that Earth, so far as we know, is the only planet in our solar system which was sufficiently far enough away from the sun, yet close enough to to the sun, to provide the ideal temperature; that it was freakishly just the right size and with the right amount of gravity to have the right atmosphere, to support life, as we know it.
PS - evolution has nothing to do with the survival of the fittest. That is the law of the jungle. Evolution is survival of those species which are most capable of adapting to their environment, unless you some how believe that a field mouse is more fit than a than a saber tooth tiger.
which is precisely why for freakish reason there must be a creator/designer. and to rifle: life comes from life... and earth again has freakishly been the only one on an entire solar system to have life. i wonder where that life came from? the big freaking bang? and spare me the scientific illiterate crap. so you are an arrogant fool, what else is new.
so science first said.. this is fact:
fast forward to year 2000 or earlier and many are pointing the silliness of it. they said it is not like that but more on genetic mutation, blah blah..
i just am finding more and more the flaw of of evolution. so spare me the insults or explanations. i am sold. evolution of man is science fiction. i have my valid reasons. exclamation point.
Last edited by baket; 03-24-2010 at 10:23 PM..
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.
Saaaayyy.... What's that smell?
