'Bill Nye the Science Guy' to Take On Creationist in Evolution Debate (work, best)

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by Ceist

You keep saying this over and over again as if it means something.

Why would the ToE address things it was never supposed to address?

Good question. Why use ToE to assert ID doesn't exist? ToE never even addresses the origins of life on this planet.

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Again, ID addresses Intelligent Design. It does not name the designer. Your question therefore makes no sense.

The decision of the court, Kitzmiller v. Dover:

The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board's ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents.

The very first sentence of the foundational document of the ID movement:

The proposition that human beings are created in the image of God is one of the bedrock principles on which Western civilization was built.

Your argument is not actually with us, IC.

It is with your fellow creationists.

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Indeed he has, and still does.

The only person you seem to have convinced is yourself. But you know full well, you haven't done even that.

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Good question. Why use ToE to assert ID doesn't exist? ToE never even addresses the origins of life on this planet.

ID certainly exists. Wrong ideas have existed since time immemorial.

It just isn't science. And you don't need the ToE to determine that fact.

[Investor Five]

Oh my, looks like the resident creationists and IDers are getting OWNED ... again...

[InformedConsent]

Maybe some of you will be better able to understand UC Berkeley's explanation:

Evolutionary theory deals mainly with how life changed after its origin. Science does try to investigate how life started (e.g., whether or not it happened near a deep-sea vent, which organic molecules came first, etc.), but these considerations are not the central focus of evolutionary theory. Regardless of how life started, afterwards it branched and diversified, and most studies of evolution are focused on those processes.

Misconceptions: A Theory about the Origin of Life

ToE does not preclude ID, and ID does not preclude ToE.

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

ToE does not preclude ID, and ID does not preclude ToE.

Why do you keep repeating that pointless straw man?

[Ceist]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

And there you have it... HistorianDude taking the coward's way out of deflecting, and consequently admitting that he cannot refute any of the molecular biology, computational biochemistry, chemical thermodynamics, and information theory analyses presented in the book.

FAIL.

Nope. We can read this thread. It was you who has been unable to come up with the author's best argument for HD to refute as asked. You were only asked to provide one argument, and you couldn't do it.

Looks like you haven't even read the book yourself.

[Ceist]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Indeed he has, and still does.

FAIL.

Nope. We can read this thread. He's waiting for you to present what you think is the author's best argument so he can refute it. You have failed to do so.

[Ceist]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Good question. Why use ToE to assert ID doesn't exist? ToE never even addresses the origins of life on this planet.

All this really shows that you have no idea what the hypothesis of Intelligent Design is or what the Theory of Evolution is.

How about you link to a website that you think represents what the 'theory' of Intelligent Design is, as you don't seem to have a clear enough idea to post it in this thread.
You seem to be waffley about whether you are referring to the so-called 'scientific theory' of Intelligent Design, the religious teleological argument for the existence of God, or vague claims like "Oh! I can see a pattern in a flower! A designer musta designed it!"