Search results

Your argument that I'm asking you to disprove ID is a joke. I'm asking you to prove your blind watchmaker theory. You're the one claiming that the origin and diversity of life on earth is solely the result of non-teleological processes. Let's see your evidence. Or are you just making a...

TraderNik: Because that what the theory you support claims! That's what this debate is all about! Teleological evolution versus non-teleological evolution. Believe what you want. Just don't claim that your no-design theory is based on proof and don't try to claim that the proof of it is...

TraderNik: I never asked you to disprove ID. I asked you for evidence of non-teleological evolution which is what you ID critics are promoting. Besides, when I ask you ID critics what you would count as evidence of ID you want proof that evolution is impossible.

James Bond 3rd: Nonsense. An Appeal to Authority takes the following form: 1. Person A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject S. 2. Person A makes claim C about subject S. 3. Therefore, C is true. I've done no such thing. Consider the article by Julie Thomas. Does anyone here...

TraderNik: Where is your evidence for a non-teleological origin of life? Where is your evidence that any major evolutionary feature originated through non-teleological mechanisms?

TraderNik: You obviously don't know what an appeal to authority is. According to Wikipedia, an appeal to authority is basing the truth of an otherwise unsupported assertion on the authority, knowledge or position of the person asserting it. Citing someone's data to prove a point is not...

Hoyle Uses the Term "Intelligent Design" in a 1982 Work Making a Design Inference for the Origin of Life By Jonathan Witt Here is an excerpt: ...an early, notable use of the term "intelligent design," is by one of the 20th century's leading scientists, agnostic Fred Hoyle. On January...

Stu: Once again, ID is not creationism and ID is not anti-evolution. So both of these articles are irrelevant to ID.

Is Evolution Needed to Make Sense of Biology? By Julie Thomas "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution." This was the title of an essay by Theodosius Dobzhansky written over thirty years ago and is the position of most Darwinists today. If nothing in biology...

So Help Us Darwin By William F. Buckley Jr. An intimidatingly learned colleague has written to a few friends to deplore the latest bulletin on Senator John McCain, who is of course running for president. The news is that McCain has agreed to speak at a luncheon hosted by the Discovery...

Your Best Objections Scott Adams I got lots of thoughtful comments to yesterday’s post on whether the Big Bang was intelligent by definition. I wasn’t planning on following up on the topic, but I feel I owe it to you. Here are the top objections that people raised, along with my replies...

Intelligence By Scott Adams I wonder how you can tell if an alien is “intelligent life.” Is there a test that fits all situations? For example, suppose we found a blob on Mars that moved under its own power and wasn’t a carbon-based life form. How could we tell if it was intelligent...

James Bond 3rd: Does this mean you recognize we are not the same person? There is no contradiction here. One can accept the reality of random mutations and natural selection without believing that evolution is an entirely accidental/coincidental process. Random mutations and natural...

James Bond 3rd: ID is an alternative to non-teleological evolution not evolution per se.

ZZZzzz: The ID critics have it backwards. There is no reason to go looking for a designer before one has reason to think something is designed. If you ask the ID critics what would cause them to merely suspect something in nature was designed they are stumped. They will accept nothing less...

James Bond 3rd: You obviously don't understand ID. ID doesn't dispute that random mutations and natural selection play an important role in the evolutionary process. ID is about how a designer might employ and exploit these mechanisms to carry out a design objective. I think we can all...

James Bond 3rd: You're the one that doesn't get it. It is the Darwinist position that the evolutionary process is devoid of design. Richard Dawkins refers to evolution as the blind watchmaker because in his words it is a "blind, unconscious, automatic process which which we know is the...

2 cents: If ID is unscientific then the blind watchmaker hypothesis is also unscientific. One is just the flip-side of the other. Let's hear your argument that the evolutionary process is entirely non-teleological. Then we can evaluate how scientific it is.

Bluud, ID is not about proving the existence of God. Your atheistic rant is irrelevant to this thread.

Scientists at the University of Edinburgh are busy imitating nature’s design by building nanomachines. Two things to note: First, these new designs are not perfect, and yet they were clearly designed by intelligence. I hope ID critics will finally put to rest the inane charge that if a...