Creationism vs Intelligent Design?

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I don't think so, but he does one heckuva great impersonation of the terminally stupid.

Sometimes you mistake stuborness for stupidity manifold .

Just waiting for someone to give me a VIALBLE and intelligent reason to change my mind.

If I actually thought you honestly believed the dren you're spewing, I might consider trying to educate you.

But I know better.

Manifold don't point out my traps to others please

 

[manifold]

Sometimes you mistake stuborness for stupidity manifold .

Just waiting for someone to give me a VIALBLE and intelligent reason to change my mind.

If I actually thought you honestly believed the dren you're spewing, I might consider trying to educate you.

But I know better.

Manifold don't point out my traps to others please

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

If I actually thought you honestly believed the dren you're spewing, I might consider trying to educate you.

But I know better.

Manifold don't point out my traps to others please

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKgPY1adc0A]YouTube - Bush "Fool Me Once..."[/ame]

 

[rikules]

Creationism means Gawd did it.
That creatures were "shimmered" into being.

Intelligent Design means it could really have happened by ET. But some biological systems are so complicated, they couldn't have "evolved", they had to be created whole and "finished".

Of course, they both have equal data backing up their less than "scientific" theories.

the reason I accept a non-religious version of ID is because humans are trying to do the same thing in laboratories all over the planet.

I have no problem accepting the possibility that (at some time in the future) humans will be able to creat life...


logically; it's possible that some species of being, FAR OLDER and more evolved than we are, created us...our universe...

perhaps
in some far off dimension
some teenage superevolved alien being is presenting our universe to his science teacher as his class project

 

[☭proletarian☭]

the reason I accept a non-religious version of ID

No such thing exists. ID is religion. The term was created by religious retards to get Christianity taught in schools and undermine educaton so America could rear a generation totally inept at science, fall behind CHina and Iran, and be wiped off the map, triggering WW3 and the apocalypse.

logically; it's possible that some species of being, FAR OLDER and more evolved than we are, created us...our universe...

You've any evidence that any life can exist and not be part of the universe?

perhaps
in some far off dimension
some teenage superevolved alien being is presenting our universe to his science teacher as his class project

Such thought experiments belong to philosophy, not science.

 

[Foxfyre]

the reason I accept a non-religious version of ID

No such thing exists. ID is religion.

So, you discount the views of Plato, Aristotle, Einstein and others who developed theories of ID outside of a religious concept? Or did you just sort of skip over that part?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

ID is a religion by definition. They posit a superhuman being outside of the universe to create all things.

 

[Foxfyre]

ID is a religion by definition. They posit a superhuman being outside of the universe to create all things.

Niether Plato nor Aristotle nor Einstein nor certain Buddhist sects, all who embrace a concept of I.D., posited any involvement of any being, superhuman or otherwise, inside or outside the univerise.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

ID is a religion by definition. They posit a superhuman being outside of the universe to create all things.

Niether Plato nor Aristotle nor Einstein nor certain Buddhist sects, all who embrace a concept of I.D., posited any involvement of any being, superhuman or otherwise, inside or outside the univerise.

So it';s designed by a non-designer?

 

[Foxfyre]

ID is a religion by definition. They posit a superhuman being outside of the universe to create all things.

Niether Plato nor Aristotle nor Einstein nor certain Buddhist sects, all who embrace a concept of I.D., posited any involvement of any being, superhuman or otherwise, inside or outside the univerise.

So it';s designed by a non-designer?

In the way they looked at it, yes. There is some cosmic intelligence that creates the order out of the universe, but it is not something they identify with a being or beings but something that is incorporated into the very universe itself--is a part of it. Plato and Buddhists saw it as a force of the human mind creating the allusion of substance out of the pre-existing idea that has been ever present. Aristotle and Einstein didn't associate it with any human or supernatural being, but reasoned that such order as is seen in the universe and all that is in it did not come from chaos purely by chance or accident.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

There is some cosmic intelligence that creates the order out of the universe

So they do posit a superhuman entity (entity) that designs everything? You said the opposite.

We're back to it being religion.

but it is not something they identify with a being or beings but something that is incorporated into the very universe itself--is a part of it.

EG: Cosmic Gaia; the universe is an intelligent being.

How did it create itself?

Again, back to it being a religion.

 

[Foxfyre]

There is some cosmic intelligence that creates the order out of the universe

So they do posit a superhuman entity (entity) that designs everything? You said the opposite.

We're back to it being religion.

but it is not something they identify with a being or beings but something that is incorporated into the very universe itself--is a part of it.

EG: Cosmic Gaia; the universe is an intelligent being.

How did it create itself?

Again, back to it being a religion.

No it isn't. And it didn't. But you're obviously going to keeping trying to float your own boat whether it is sinking or not. Do have a great day.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

ID is a religion by definition. They posit a superhuman being outside of the universe to create all things.

Niether Plato nor Aristotle nor Einstein nor certain Buddhist sects, all who embrace a concept of I.D., posited any involvement of any being, superhuman or otherwise, inside or outside the univerise.

You didn't say that?

 

[rikules]

the reason I accept a non-religious version of ID

No such thing exists. ID is religion. The term was created by religious retards to get Christianity taught in schools and undermine educaton so America could rear a generation totally inept at science, fall behind CHina and Iran, and be wiped off the map, triggering WW3 and the apocalypse.

logically; it's possible that some species of being, FAR OLDER and more evolved than we are, created us...our universe...

You've any evidence that any life can exist and not be part of the universe?

perhaps
in some far off dimension
some teenage superevolved alien being is presenting our universe to his science teacher as his class project

Such thought experiments belong to philosophy, not science.

"No such thing exists. ID is religion. "


then I'll be the first to toss this theory out...


we'll call...riktivity!


basically it goes like this...

about 14 billion years ago a race of superevolved beings in a VERY DIFFERENT DIMENSION that us found a way to create a whole new universe in our dimension....

so they did


and here we are.

"You've any evidence that any life can exist and not be part of the universe?"

no
of course not

and that is NOT the point

it's just a theory....

I'm not saying I BELIEVE it....
I'm saying that I can see its' plausability....


Such thought experiments belong to philosophy, not science.[/QUOTE]


absolutely

but that doesn't mean that it isn't REAL.

just because both you and I do NOT BELIEVE IN any form of ID does NOT mean that ID isn't real.


as unlikely as it is it is certainly still POSSIBLE (to some insignificant degree) that a NON-religious ID could have happened

 

[Foxfyre]

ID is a religion by definition. They posit a superhuman being outside of the universe to create all things.

Niether Plato nor Aristotle nor Einstein nor certain Buddhist sects, all who embrace a concept of I.D., posited any involvement of any being, superhuman or otherwise, inside or outside the univerise.

You didn't say that?

I certainly did say that. And I believe that will hold up under closer scrutiny. But their understanding did not involve a "Creator God" or any other supreme being or any other religious concept. Their intelligence was no doubt far superior to mine, but at least I can understand what they meant by intelligence. And I think if you would look at it as they looked at it so could you.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

about 14 billion years ago a race of superevolved beings in a VERY DIFFERENT DIMENSION that us found a way to create a whole new universe in our dimension....

so they did

Interesting hypothesis (not a theory). Now where's your evidence? What you have none? Then there's no reason at all to hear you out.

it's just a theory....

Actually, it's a hypothesis and isn't to be taken even remotely seriously since you have zero evidence.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

I certainly did say that.

Make up your mind.

 

[Foxfyre]

I certainly did say that.

Make up your mind.

Again, when one looks only through the tunnel, one cannot see how much broader is the universe and how many are the ways to contemplate it than what one sees in the tunnel. When you are able to give up the tunnel and come out into the real world, you might be able to to understand Plato, Aristotle, and Einsteins point of view. Until then, again, do have a great day.

 

[geauxtohell]

Interesting hypothesis (not a theory). Now where's your evidence? What you have none? Then there's no reason at all to hear you out.

2001: A Space Odyssey.

Of course; Arthur Clark, being the good scientist he was, ever claimed that his book was anything other than science fiction.

 

[THE LIGHT]

ID is a religion by definition. They posit a superhuman being outside of the universe to create all things.

No, the fact that the earth had a beginning has been scientifically proven.

ID just says in the beginning "something created..." while you say, in the beginning "nothing exploded to create..."