"Intelligent" Design

[YT2095]

Buzsaw, I have to take issue with some of this, Science and Christian church have gone hand in hand quite alot!

 

Gregor Mendel was a Christian Monk, when he did his genetics experiments with peas in the 1800s!

here`s some stats barring his email adress!: http://712educators.about.com/cs/biographies/p/mendel.htm

 

the Christians did a whole lot of astronomy too!

[buzsaw]

Science is agnostic, ergo by your definition, they have to be secular, so "secular scientist" redundant. If there is no evidence of a higher intelligence, one cannot assume it; to do so is to violate the scientific method, and thus not be a scientist.

 

There are a number of highly degreed scientists and archeologists who believe in higher intelligence and do science on that basis as per the definition of science.

[CPL.Luke]

buzsaw if someone could prove beyond a doubt that evolution was wrong or that any part of creationism was right every scientific journal in the world would want to publish them.

[buzsaw]

Buzsaw' date=' I have to take issue with some of this, Science and Christian church have gone hand in hand quite alot!

 

Gregor Mendel was a Christian Monk, when he did his genetics experiments with peas in the 1800s!

here`s some stats barring his email adress!: http://712educators.about.com/cs/biographies/p/mendel.htm

 

the Christians did a whole lot of astronomy too![/quote']

 

Thanks, VT, for coming on the thread. I respect the intelligence and knowledge you've blessed the board with. I'll check out the link.

[buzsaw]

buzsaw if someone could prove beyond a doubt that evolution was wrong or that any part of creationism was right every scientific journal in the world would want to publish them.

 

LOL, CPL Luke. If that were the case, they'd be publishing some ID stuff now, imo. Who, among them, wants to admit they might have been wrong about ID? Scarcely few, I'm afraid.

[buzsaw]

creationists have their act togather?

 

They're working on it. I suppose a lot of that depends on one's mindset.

[ydoaPs]

LOL, CPL Luke. If that were the case, they'd be publishing some ID stuff now, imo. Who, among them, wants to admit they might have been wrong about ID? Scarcely few, I'm afraid.

Ha! that's funny..

 

"god did it. i have no proof. will you publish it?"

 

"this is the best theory i've ever heard of! of course we'll publish it!"

[CPL.Luke]

I suppose no one would want to publish special relativity then as it broke the aether.

 

let alone GR that overturned newtonian gravity.

 

and everyone would have flat out denied the validity of the double-slit experiment that showed wave particle duality

 

or even before that de-broglie waves would have been laughed at.

[ydoaPs]

i stubled upon this today:

If you can apply any argument for the existence of God to the existence of the tooth fairy then that argument loses a lot of credence.

think about it

[swansont]

LOL, CPL Luke. If that were the case, they'd be publishing some ID stuff now, imo. Who, among them, wants to admit they might have been wrong about ID? Scarcely few, I'm afraid.

 

 

That's right. When "God did it" doesn't apply, invoke the worldwide conspiracy angle. Gotta admire the consistency - "Evidence? We don't got no evidence! We don't need no steenking evidence!"

[buzsaw]

Ha! that's funny..

 

"god did it. i have no proof. will you publish it?"

 

"this is the best theory i've ever heard of! of course we'll publish it!"

 

Why do you keep on keeping on falsly stating that creation scientists don't include real science in much of their work. Furthermore' date=' why are you saying they need proof when little of what you believe in science is [i']proven[/i]? Come on, now. Post forthright and be fair or please stop crapping up the thread with nonsense. You know full well I'd not be allowed to do this stuff to you, so please stop doing it to me.

[buzsaw]

I suppose no one would want to publish special relativity then as it broke the aether.

 

let alone GR that overturned newtonian gravity.

 

and everyone would have flat out denied the validity of the double-slit experiment that showed wave particle duality

 

or even before that de-broglie waves would have been laughed at.

 

Very likely there are some areas folks like ICR do studies in that would be worthy of publishing in the journals if they were fair and balanced. And why isn't National Geographic's ocean researcher/oceanographer, the noted Robert Ballard checking out those chariot wheels creationist scientist researchers have videoed in the Gulf of Aqaba off the Red Sea, along with all the other corroborating stuff in the area relative to the Exodus? Secularists are being critical of this discovery, but where are their people who should be checking it out? Are they afraid of what they might discover/verify?

[buzsaw]

That's right. When "God did it" doesn't apply, invoke the worldwide conspiracy angle. Gotta admire the consistency - "Evidence? We don't got no evidence! We don't need no steenking evidence!"

 

Ditto to my response to yourdadonapogos. Please stop falsy implying that creation IDist scientists don't do bonafide science. They use some of the same evidence you people use with a different interpretation of what is observed. Much of neither has been proven. Both rely on theory and hypothesis so far as much of what is observed as to what it means. When you people prove there's not a higher form of intelligence in the universe, then you can laugh your heads off. Until then, let us do our science and you do yours. Let us post our thoughts/arguments and you yours in a civil and forthright manner. May the truth eventually emerge, and it surely eventually will. Then we'll all likely be dead wrong on some aspects of our studies and right on others. Debate and diversity of study, methodology and thought is how we all learn.

[CPL.Luke]

nice strawman, there are plenty of people out there who look for relics from the bible, not necessarily to show that god exists, more jsut to show that the events are loosely based off of a real event.

 

also the parting of the red sea was a misstranslation as I recall. It was actually a parting of the reed sea, which is a tidal sea in the same area that has highly irregular tides, and the tides tend to go out and come in very quickly.

 

scientists regularly try to grind others theories into dust, if there was any real evidence it would have been published.

[swansont]

Ditto to my response to yourdadonapogos. Please stop falsy implying that creation IDist scientists don't do bonafide science. They use some of the same evidence you people use with a different interpretation of what is observed. Much of neither has been proven[/i']. Both rely on theory and hypothesis so far as much of what is observed as to what it means. When you people prove there's not a higher form of intelligence in the universe, then you can laugh your heads off. Until then, let us do our science and you do yours. Let us post our thoughts/arguments and you yours in a civil and forthright manner. May the truth eventually emerge, and it surely eventually will. Then we'll all likely be dead wrong on some aspects of our studies and right on others. Debate and diversity of study, methodology and thought is how we all learn.

 

In that post I wasn't implying that, I was addressing your ludicrous "appeal to conspiracy" as the reason for lack of publication.

 

But, since you bring it up, what real science are IDists doing? How is it falsifiable?

[ydoaPs]

i've yet to hear of this real ID science. can you post some links?

[buzsaw]

....... the parting of the red sea was a misstranslation as I recall. It was actually a parting of the reed sea' date=' which is a tidal sea in the same area that has highly irregular tides, and the tides tend to go out and come in very quickly.[/quote']

 

The same Hebrew word is used in I Kings 9:26, referring to the port of the Red Sea at Edom which is the port of Aqaba proving that however you want to translate it, the Gulf Of Aqaba is inclusive in it.

 

scientists regularly try to grind others theories into dust, if there was any real evidence it would have been published.

 

.......And as seems to be the case here, when they can't grind it to dust, it appears they choose to avoid it.

[buzsaw]

i've yet to hear of this real ID science. can you post some links?

 

I'm presently strapped for time with my business. Give me some time and I'll see what I can find for you. In the mean time you might like to read up on the research ICR has done on the Grand Canyon. Then you may find it interesting to do a google on Aqaba, the chariot wheels and the corroborating evidence for the Biblical Exodus at Nuweiba Beach on the Gulf of Aqaba. Both Wyatt who pioneered this and a Swedish scientist by the name of Lennart Moller who has published THE EXODUS CASE and THE EXODUS REVEALED video on his extensive research in the region about this.

 

Edited to correct video name, Moller's first name and that he was from Sweden.

[LucidDreamer]

Buzsaw, I admire your steadfastness and temperance.

[buzsaw]

Buzsaw, I admire your steadfastness and temperance.

 

Thanks, LD. I try. I get a kick out of your signature, btw.

[ydoaPs]

you have already been told that the icr grand cranyon stuff if complete rubbish and why that is so.

[The Peon]

Can we go to Mars and get some microbes from the ice caps to show that life happens everywhere? What will ID believers state when life is proven to be a naturally occuring part of terraforming in certain conditions?

[buzsaw]

you have already been told that the icr grand cranyon stuff if complete rubbish and why that is so.

 

........And you haven't heard all the arguments for ICR's views on it, have you? Their video on it goes into all the details regarding the science they've done. They do public debates with notable counterparts in many scholastic arenas on various science topics, so likely their arguments would need to have some credence for them to keep up this public activity.

[buzsaw]

Can we go to Mars and get some microbes from the ice caps to show that life happens everywhere? What will ID believers state when life is proven to be a naturally occuring part of terraforming in certain conditions?

 

LOL! I'm not holding my breath on those microbes, but I'm convinced that countless other living beings exist in the universe and that I do indeed communicate daily with the highest of them, the creator, manager and majesty of them and us via the mediatory work of the man Jesus who lived on, died on and resurrected from planet earth, according to the Biblical record. I cannot prove that to you, nor is this thread the place to try, but I have experienced remarkable evidence of this, having been a devout Christian for 60 years since age 10.

[The Peon]

LOL! I'm not holding my breath on those microbes, but I'm convinced that countless other living beings exist in the universe and that I do indeed communicate daily with the highest of them, the creator, manager and majesty of them and us via the mediatory work of the man Jesus who lived on, died on and resurrected from planet earth, according to the Biblical record. I cannot prove that to you, nor is this thread the place to try, but I have experienced remarkable evidence of this, having been a devout Christian for 60 years since age 10.

 

 

I still would like to know what kind of answer you would have when the microbes are found. Ah well, I guess we will know within the next few years when they get some.

 

And your book has some flaws..

 

GOD'S QUALITIES (part 1) - 1 John 4:8

God is love.

 

GOD'S QUALITIES (part 2) - 1 Corinthians 13:4

Love is not jealous.

 

GOD'S QUALITIES (part 3) - Exodus 20:5

"I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God."

 

GOD'S QUALITIES (part 4) AND NAME - Exodus 34:14

For thou shalt worship no other god: for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.

 

Many more exist.