RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants.

RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Science & Origins

Message

ianz -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 5:47:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: The evidence won't be in the tenets of ID, but the statements and actions of ID proponents themselves. It's ok if you are not a creationist and are an ID proponent, I'm just saying that most are both. And what are in the tenets of ID that will cause an ID proponent to be a creationist? The fundamental notion that an intelligent being of some sort designed the complexity we see - I should think that this begs the question "who?". Since ID requires a creator, it surely leads supporters to assume that there is indeed a creator. Regards, Ian

swan42 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 5:49:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: The evidence won't be in the tenets of ID, but the statements and actions of ID proponents themselves. It's ok if you are not a creationist and are an ID proponent, I'm just saying that most are both. And what are in the tenets of ID that will cause an ID proponent to be a creationist? You have it backwards. Why would a creationist be an ID proponent?

swan42 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 5:50:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ianz quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: The evidence won't be in the tenets of ID, but the statements and actions of ID proponents themselves. It's ok if you are not a creationist and are an ID proponent, I'm just saying that most are both. And what are in the tenets of ID that will cause an ID proponent to be a creationist? The fundamental notion that an intelligent being of some sort designed the complexity we see - I should think that this begs the question "who?". Since ID requires a creator, it surely leads supporters to assume that there is indeed a creator. Regards, Ian Absolutely, but ID proponents should be looking far and wide instead of just the Bible.

Jhud -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 5:52:46 PM)
quote: The fundamental notion that an intelligent being of some sort designed the complexity we see - I should think that this begs the question "who?". Since ID requires a creator, it surely leads supporters to assume that there is indeed a creator. Well, yes, intelligent design obviously concerns itself with detecting intelligences that design, that is a given, but that isn't a tenet of ID. What specific tenets, what principles ID is based on, are intrinsically tied up with either being a creationist or following a 'wedge strategy', whatever that might be?

swan42 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 5:55:24 PM)
quote: following a 'wedge strategy', whatever that might be? The Wedge Strategy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_strategy

Jhud -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 5:57:02 PM)
quote: The Wedge Strategy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_strategy Not an answer to the question; what tenets of ID require it to be intrinsically tied up with such notions?

Jhud -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 6:00:48 PM)
swan? ian? Got an answer? Anything useful? Substantive? Intellectually promising? Slightly intelligent?

swan42 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 6:01:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: The Wedge Strategy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_strategy Not an answer to the question; what tenets of ID require it to be intrinsically tied up with such notions? None! That's why we should keep ID proponents on the straight and narrow and prevent them from favoring a Judeo-Christian explanation. It would now be useful to read the Wedge Document..

Jhud -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 6:04:28 PM)
quote: None! That's why we should keep ID proponents on the straight and narrow and prevent them from favoring a Judeo-Christian explanation. It would now be useful to read the Wedge Document.. Very good. As you have acknowledged, nothing in ID intrinsically lends itself to either a religious belief or political strategy.

ianz -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 6:12:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud swan? ian? Got an answer? Anything useful? Substantive? Intellectually promising? Slightly intelligent? Hey easy does it there's no need to be offensive. I've got no axe to grind. By creationist with a little c I assumed you meant someone who believed that there had been a creator, not necessarily the God of the Bible. I agree that nothing specific in ID says you have to be a Creationist. You do have to be someone that believes an intelligent form designed us. And given the options (aliens or a god), it seems plausible to assume that most will plump for a god. Regards, Ian

Jhud -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 6:16:18 PM)
quote: Hey easy does it there's no need to be offensive. I've got no axe to grind. By creationist with a little c I assumed you meant someone who believed that there had been a creator, not necessarily the God of the Bible. I agree that nothing specific in ID says you have to be a Creationist. You do have to be someone that believes an intelligent form designed us. And given the options (aliens or a god), it seems plausible to assume that most will plump for a god. Well, no, all you have to believe to be an IDist is that the activity of an intelligence is detectable. What tends to distinguish IDists is that they consider the possibility that these detection schema can be applied to biological structures and systems.

ianz -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 6:26:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: Hey easy does it there's no need to be offensive. I've got no axe to grind. By creationist with a little c I assumed you meant someone who believed that there had been a creator, not necessarily the God of the Bible. I agree that nothing specific in ID says you have to be a Creationist. You do have to be someone that believes an intelligent form designed us. And given the options (aliens or a god), it seems plausible to assume that most will plump for a god. Well, no, all you have to believe to be an IDist is that the activity of an intelligence is detectable. I thought ID was about finding the intelligent activity that is known to exist. Perhaps I have misunderstood. If it's only about believing that intelligent activity, if it existed, could be detected, then does ID therefore permit the possibility that there is no intelligent design to detect? Regards, Ian

Jhud -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 6:35:53 PM)
quote: I thought ID was about finding the intelligent activity that is known to exist. Perhaps I have misunderstood. If it's only about believing that intelligent activity, if it existed, could be detected, then does ID therefore permit the possibility that there is no intelligent design to detect? It does.

ianz -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 6:50:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: I thought ID was about finding the intelligent activity that is known to exist. Perhaps I have misunderstood. If it's only about believing that intelligent activity, if it existed, could be detected, then does ID therefore permit the possibility that there is no intelligent design to detect? It does. Ahhhhhhhhh. Right. Thank you I now have a much better understanding of the matter, and I can understand why you note that ID doesn't require a creator. This is way off topic now but I'd like to continue if I may. If the intelligent activity, if it exists, was carried out by a being more intelligent than us, how could we detect this intelligent activity?

Jhud -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 6:53:53 PM)
quote: If the intelligent activity, if it exists, was carried out by a being more intelligent than us, how could we detect this intelligent activity? I don't know how to build a particle accelerator, but I am fairly certain someone does, and intelligence is required to do it.

ianz -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 6:58:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: If the intelligent activity, if it exists, was carried out by a being more intelligent than us, how could we detect this intelligent activity? I don't know how to build a particle accelerator, but I am fairly certain someone does, and intelligence is required to do it. But you know a particle accelerator exists and is man-made, so you have a head start. What about something not man-made?

Jhud -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 7:04:57 PM)
quote: But you know a particle accelerator exists and is man-made, so you have a head start. What about something not man-made? I don't know how to build a beaver dam, but I think it exhibits a level of intelligence. Or better still, if I was an astronaut, and I came across a an obelisk on the moon buried hundreds of feet below the surface that had images on it's side depicting a being travelling from a nearby star sytem, I would recognize it as designed even if I knew nothing about interstellar travel.

drj11 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 7:49:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: None! That's why we should keep ID proponents on the straight and narrow and prevent them from favoring a Judeo-Christian explanation. It would now be useful to read the Wedge Document.. Very good. As you have acknowledged, nothing in ID intrinsically lends itself to either a religious belief or political strategy. I dont know how you can say that, as the wedge document indicates, modern ID was entirely devised for use as a political strategy. The people behind the document are the one's responsible for the 'tenets' of ID, as it is today. ID is inseparable from the wedge document, the DI, and their dishonest intentions.

swan42 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 8:54:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: drj11 quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: None! That's why we should keep ID proponents on the straight and narrow and prevent them from favoring a Judeo-Christian explanation. It would now be useful to read the Wedge Document.. Very good. As you have acknowledged, nothing in ID intrinsically lends itself to either a religious belief or political strategy. I dont know how you can say that, as the wedge document indicates, modern ID was entirely devised for use as a political strategy. The people behind the document are the one's responsible for the 'tenets' of ID, as it is today. ID is inseparable from the wedge document, the DI, and their dishonest intentions. William Dembski states in his book Design Inference that the nature of the intelligent designer cannot be inferred from intelligent design.[citation needed] In December 2007 Dembski told Focus on the Family that "The Designer of intelligent design is, ultimately, the Christian God."[8] Some leading intelligent design proponents have stated identifying or characterizing the designer is beyond the scope of intelligent design as a line of inquiry. Proponents had hoped that, by avoiding invoking creation by a specific supernatural entity, (such as that employed by creation science), intelligent design would be considered scientific and not violate the establishment clause of the US constitution. They should identify the designer, it would be strongest evidence in favor of ID.

swan42 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 9:02:20 PM)
"Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of intelligent design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools." -- Phillip E. Johnson, American Family Radio, January 10, 2003 [16]

swan42 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 9:08:34 PM)
Critics contend the claim that positing a designer which explains gaps in our understanding yet does not need to be itself explained as not a contribution to knowledge but as a thought-terminating clich�.[28][29]

swan42 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 11:09:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: swan42 quote: ORIGINAL: ianz quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: The evidence won't be in the tenets of ID, but the statements and actions of ID proponents themselves. It's ok if you are not a creationist and are an ID proponent, I'm just saying that most are both. And what are in the tenets of ID that will cause an ID proponent to be a creationist? The fundamental notion that an intelligent being of some sort designed the complexity we see - I should think that this begs the question "who?". Since ID requires a creator, it surely leads supporters to assume that there is indeed a creator. Regards, Ian Absolutely, but ID proponents should be looking far and wide instead of just the Bible. Good timing... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7399661.stm

Jhud -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/14/2008 11:23:04 PM)
quote: I dont know how you can say that, as the wedge document indicates, modern ID was entirely devised for use as a political strategy. The people behind the document are the one's responsible for the 'tenets' of ID, as it is today. ID is inseparable from the wedge document, the DI, and their dishonest intentions. Believe it or not, no one makes you sign off on a ten year old flyer before you accept the basic logic of ID.

ianz -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/15/2008 3:40:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: But you know a particle accelerator exists and is man-made, so you have a head start. What about something not man-made? I don't know how to build a beaver dam, but I think it exhibits a level of intelligence. Or better still, if I was an astronaut, and I came across a an obelisk on the moon buried hundreds of feet below the surface that had images on it's side depicting a being travelling from a nearby star sytem, I would recognize it as designed even if I knew nothing about interstellar travel. What about a toasted sandwich with what appears to be the image of Mary on it? Regards, Ian

Jhud -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/15/2008 3:48:21 AM)
quote: What about a toasted sandwich with what appears to be the image of Mary on it? Well, that is why ascertaining purpose is important to detecting design.

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI