Defending the Wedge Strategy

[FanOfFridays]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

As usual you got it wrong. It's the ID critics that ask the ID'ers to prove evolution is impossible.

Do you believe that if you just make this stuff up and post it enough times, it will become true?

I have NEVER ONCE

asked you to prove evolution impossible. I defy you to post a link in which I ask that. You claim that ID is a scientifically provable and when asked to produce ONE SHRED of that proof, you run away and hide or post ridiculous evasions like this one.

You have shown this personality to be a blatant liar, just like your Z personality.

ID fanatic: ID is a scientifically provable theory!!

ID critic: Really? Ok, can you provide us with some of that proof or post a link please?

ID fanatic: Why don't you prove that ID isn't possible?

ID critc: Ummm.... I'm not sure I understand - it is not up to me to prove your theory impossible. You claimed it is provable, I am asking for an example of that proof! You can't say a theory is proved because I can't disprove it!!

ID fanatic: The scientific method is brainwashing!!!!

ID critic: Errrr... it is? But aren't you actually claiming that ID is a scientifically provable alternative to evolution?

ID'er: (threatens anal penetration)

ID has nothing to do with the origin of life on earth. It is a political movement whose aim is to reshape Western society in a manner consistent with a narrow radical Christian view of the world. ID'ers do not care that the majority of Westerners do not share these beliefs.

When you post as Z, at least you try to cloud the issue with threats of anal penetration if we keep harassing you. I like the Z alias better, it's more entertaining.

 

[2cents]

Quote from CaptainObvious:

Why would true science be afraid of exploring ID as an explanation of the "why" of the process of evolution? The mechanics of evolution are only part of the equation. The why remains unknown. Real science explores all possibilities until those possibilities are proven invalid. Can someone provide the proof that ID is patently false? Could it be false? Certainly! But that has yet to be proven.

please point us towards the theoretical basis / text of ID on evolution, i am curious... as far as we know, there isn't one... therefore in a sense its "not even wrong"... but you seem to know better

 

[2cents]

Quote from Teleologist:

Intelligent design has nothing to do with religion. It has nothing to do with the supernatural. And ID is not anti-evolution if one defines evolution simply as “change over time,Eor even that living things are related by common ancestry. However, the National Association of Biology Teachers contends that evolution is "an unpredictable and purposeless process" that “has no discernable direction or goal, including survival of a species.E It is this specific claim made by neo-Darwinism that intelligent design directly challenges.

The question —How Did the Appearance of Design in Living Systems Arise—Has Long Been Part of Historical and Evolutionary Biology.

As detailed in Richard Dawkins book The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design, Darwinian theory was developed as a counter argument to the observed fact that living systems appear to be designed.

i am sorry but, observed by WHO??? i grew up in parts of europe, africa & asia pretty close to the ground and was extremely curious about nature and biology from a young age... i can't recall thinking of it as being designed in any way EVER... can u help me out here... examples?

why should we take you on faith, that there MUST be a purpose, design etc?? so far we've got a perfectly sound battle-tested scientific theory that doesn't incorporate any such axiom, thank you very much...

next!

 

[2cents]

Quote from CaptainObvious:

How many times over the centuries have people claimed things to be impossible only to have that notion proved wrong as mankind advanced? Thankfully, everyone has not taken your attitude, or we'd all be laughing our asses off while living in caves.

like, that the earth is flat, that the sun & the stars revolve around the earth, that the earth is a young 6,000 year-old lass, etc etc...

quite a laugh yes... now i've got another one for you straight from the cavemen... nature is designed

 

[FanOfFridays]

Quote from Zeleologist:

the observed fact that living systems appear to be designed.

The observed fact that systems appear to be designed.

The observed fact that systems appear to be designed.

The observed fact that systems appear to be designed.

The observed fact that systems appear to be designed.

AH YES!!! That fact. The FACT that they APPEAR to be designed. Yes, indeed.

What a total and utter joke. You can't even call this shoddy reasoning. It is beneath that. That's why I keep suggesting that these people aren't serious when they make posts like this. It is just impossible to believe that anyone could seriously make a statement like this.

I beg of you, consider this from ZZZzzzzzzz

Quote from Zeleologist-pilier:
How do you measure design?

One way would be to first measure “chance” then take the reciprocal to get the design metric.

I asked anyone from either side to come on here and attempt to stand behind this nonsense. No one dared.

Just pathetic.

 

[FanOfFridays]

Quote from Cap:
Why would true science be afraid of exploring ID as an explanation of the "why" of the process of evolution? The mechanics of evolution are only part of the equation. The why remains unknown.

Cap, for the life of me I can't figure out how we would ever go about proving something like that. The problem is that the whole concept of there being an intelligent designer is rooted in faith, not logic or reasoning or empiricism. I hope you will agree with that.

Quote from Cap:
Real science explores all possibilities until those possibilities are proven invalid. Can someone provide the proof that ID is patently false? Could it be false? Certainly! But that has yet to be proven.

See, that's the whole point here. ID is not falsifiable!! That is one of the key arguments we have been trying to make here. How on earth could you ever prove that God doesn't exist? The question is absurd.

This is what the ID'ers know - that's why, when the ID'ers say that ID is a scientifically provable theory, and we ask for even one shred of proof, they come back at us with 'Can you prove that ID is false?' They know damn well that can never be proved.

We can, however, prove that common table salt is made up of a sodium ion and a chloride ion.

Right?

 

[2cents]

Quote from Teleologist:

This cuts both ways. The ID critics believe that non-intelligent processes were behind all origin events. But how did they get to this belief? Did they develop some experiment to distinguish products of blind watchmaking from products of intelligent design? No. They have no test, they have no method, they have no procedure for determining an evolutionary origin via non-intelligent causes. Shesssh.

they don't need one... they have robust scientific theories and procedures to demonstrate and experimentally verify that causality breaks down in nature not just at subatomic level but as high up as molecular level...
http://elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1275145&highlight=effects#post1275145

complex systems science, nonlinear science, is steadily developing theoretical models of what happens at all other relevant scales, incl species, civilisational etc...
http://elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=80437&highlight=complex

causality, purpose? think again

 

[2cents]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

It has replaced religion for many as a means to explain the unknown, and then people take it wholly on faith, then they want to propagate that faith in order to reinforce their own belief systems...it has become dogma

i didn't know that religion had any means to explain the unknown??? why shld that be the purpose of religion anyway??? faith is not about fairy tales imo... except for simpletons perhaps

a key message of science is that, with the proper approach and keeping an open mindset including challenging current science with equally rigourous science, today's unknowns may not remain unknowns forever...

 

[2cents]

Quote from traderNik:

Cap, for the life of me I can't figure out how we would ever go about proving something like that. The problem is that the whole concept of there being an intelligent designer is rooted in faith, not logic or reasoning or empiricism. I hope you will agree with that.

See, that's the whole point here. ID is not falsifiable!! That is one of the key arguments we have been trying to make here. How on earth could you ever prove that God doesn't exist? The question is absurd.

This is what the ID'ers know - that's why, when the ID'ers say that ID is a scientifically provable theory, and we ask for even one shred of proof, they come back at us with 'Can you prove that ID is false?' They know damn well that can never be proved.

We can, however, prove that common table salt is made up of a sodium ion and a chloride ion.

Right?

and i am still waiting for a proof that IS and the Flying Spaghetti Monster theories are false...

 

[FanOfFridays]

Quote from 2cents:

and i am still waiting for a proof that IS and the Flying Spaghetti Monster theories are false...

That's right!! Since ID'ers only rebuttal when we ask them for the proof they promised is 'Can you disprove ID?', we can legitimately claim that IS and the Flying Spaghetti Monsters theories are just as valid. Not to mention my own theory, GC. The Green-Cheesians will not be forgotten!!

Quote from Zeleologist-pilier:
How do you measure design?

One way would be to first measure “chance” then take the reciprocal to get the design metric.

Similarly, Green-Cheesian theory is rooted in the diametric analysis of conjoined absolutes; the iambic nature of the lunar aspect shows hyper-morbidity in nano-states approaching null. For this reason, it is an inescapable conclusion that Neo-Fromagian reduction is a fait-accompli, and that terran milk-solids are syncretic in the ouvre.

Can anyone prove that this is not true?