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.
You keep using the same definition of Intelligent Design that Creationists created to try to hide the fact that ID is creationism rebadged.
Rebadged creationism? Based on what? There is no claim in ID that God created everything or even anything at all. There also is no claim that everything was created.
You're still stuck with this quandary:
God did not create GMO crops. GMO crops did not evolve in a natural hereditary process.
Creationism doesn't apply. ToE doesn't apply.
ID: "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
Note that ID does not assert that God created everything or even anything at all.
Based on the overwhelming evidence that has been presented to you over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again in this thread.
Based on the overwhelming evidence that has been presented to you over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again in this thread.
Evidence of people making ridiculous assumptions and accusations? Oh, yeah, I remember... you're an AGW cultist.
Instead of fearful rumor and innuendo , stick with the ACTUAL DEFINITION:
ID: "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
There is no claim in ID that God created everything or even anything at all. There also is no claim that everything was created.
You're still stuck with this quandary:
God did not create GMO crops. GMO crops did not evolve in a natural hereditary process.
Creationism doesn't apply. ToE doesn't apply.
The Earth and the heavens were slapped together/created in a period of 6 days 6000 years ago by some pan dimensional super being .
or
Life on Earth slowly evolved to what it is today over a period of 4 billion years by a process of natural evolution..
Until i see more credible evidence/proof of the former the latter theory seems to be more plausible IMO.
Evidence of people making ridiculous assumptions and accusations?
Instead of fearful rumor and innuendo , stick with the ACTUAL DEFINITION:
ID: "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection
There is no "fearful rumor or innuendo". It was proven in a court of law - Kitzmiller v Dover. And in the Creationist IDers own Wedge document. And on their own websites. This has been shown to you many times in this thread- you just pretend it doesn't exist.
You mean stick with the ACTUAL DEFINITION of ID that was created by Creationists from the Discovery Institute? The definition that you keep repeating over and over and over again?
IC's usual idiotic blah blah blah repeated over and over...
There is no claim in ID that God created everything or even anything at all. There also is no claim that everything was created.
And once more.... because you didn't seem to be able to understand it the first gazillion times it's been shown in this thread...
That's exactly what the Creationists who created the definition of Intelligent Design (that you keep quoting over and over again) believe.
The irony is incredibly funny.
The intelligent design movement is a neo-creationist religious campaign for broad social, academic and political change to promote and support the idea of "intelligent design," which asserts that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not a possibly undirected process such as natural selection."[1][2] Its chief activities are a campaign to promote public awareness of this concept, the lobbying of policymakers to include its teaching in high school science classes, and legal action, either to defend such teaching or to remove barriers otherwise preventing it.[3][4]
The movement arose out of the previous Christian fundamentalist and evangelistic creation science movement in the United States,[5] and is driven by a small group of proponents.[6][7] The overall goal of the intelligent design movement is to "overthrow materialism" and atheism. Its proponents believe that society has suffered "devastating cultural consequences" from adopting materialism and that science is the cause of the decay into materialism because it seeks only natural explanations, and is therefore atheistic. They believe that the theory of evolution implies that humans have no spiritual nature, no moral purpose, and no intrinsic meaning. They seek to "defeat [the] materialist world view" represented by the theory of evolution in favor of "a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions".[3]
So was the fact that Blacks couldn't be U.S. citizens. Courts aren't infallible.
You're still stuck with this quandary:
ID: "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
God did not create GMO crops. GMO crops did not evolve in a natural hereditary process.
Creationism doesn't apply. ToE doesn't apply.
GMO crops fit exactly the definition of ID.
Again... There is no claim in ID that God created everything or even anything at all. There also is no claim that everything was created.
I asked you... All you did was post an evolutionary event that already happened in weeds. It had nothing to do with GMO crops.
So, let's see it!
Here's only a partial list of GMO crops:
Maize
Wheat
Rapeseed/Canola
Soybeans
Cotton
Get moving! You have a lot of work to do!
No, your original response was to my statement that the traits in a GMO crop could occur without any human intervention. I showed you that resistance to Round Up occurs naturally. That means that yes, given time and exposure to Round Up, evolved resistance can (and probably will) happen in any plant population, including food crops.
If you are going to argue about genetics, for goodness sake at least learn something about genetics! Your ignorance is showing.
No, your original response was to my statement that the traits in a GMO crop could occur without any human intervention.
False:
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Sigh... Go ahead and try to prove that GENETICALLY Modified crops would have naturally evolved. Let's see your evolution map, including any and all possible offspring permutations, genetic mutations, rule out the deleterious effects of such mutations, the heritability of the mutated traits, etc., etc.
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.
Oh, yeah, I remember... you're an AGW cultist. 
