NationStates Jolt Archive

So the hypothesis of ID is that any complex system has be designed by an intelligent agent, right?

What about non-living things like boulders, clouds, water, you know, physical stuff.

Somebody else made those?

My argument against ID has always been that... have you ever LOOKED at our world? The creatures, our own bodies? Only an idiot could have designed this.

So the hypothesis of ID is that any complex system has be designed by an intelligent agent, right?

What about non-living things like boulders, clouds, water, you know, physical stuff.

Somebody else made those?
Well, considering that the intelligent designer is supposed to be God and because he supposedly made all the answer is that it is the same creator. I mean, the dudes off in Kansas aren't claiming that aliens made them, they're trying to put the Fun of Fundamentalism into their school system.

Intelligent Design is a double-edged swords that Fundies don't know are pointed the wrong way either. What if human life on Earth really was planted by a sentient being, but what if it wasn't God... but say if we're lucky The Ancients, and if not The Great Old Ones?

Well, considering that the intelligent designer is supposed to be God and because he supposedly made all the answer is that it is the same creator. I mean, the dudes off in Kansas aren't claiming that aliens made them, they're trying to put the Fun of Fundamentalism into their school system.

Isn't central to their "irreducible complexity" bit? If there is only one thing that ID does predict - it clearly proposes that the "life-giver" must be a different deity/alien from the creator of the physical universe. Especially the mundane non-complex bits.

Like floating rock in space or gas clouds and whatever.

Wait, are you claiming that Intelligent Design contradicts the creationism? That's sort of ridiculous don't you think given the nature of ID? If anything, only the same being would be capable of doing any of it. Of course they might put some half-assed attempt up to hide who this designer is but we know that in the first day he created light and on the seventh he rested.

I've always wondered what the intelligent design explanation for the appendix or vestigial tales was.

I've always wondered what the intelligent design explanation for the appendix or vestigial tales was.
Do you want to go to hell unbeliever?:D

Do you want to go to hell unbeliever?:D
Will my appendix do something in hell? ;)

I've always wondered what the intelligent design explanation for the appendix or vestigial tales was.

"The designer is intelligent, so just trust that it's a good thing."

So the hypothesis of ID is that any complex system has be designed by an intelligent agent, right?

What about non-living things like boulders, clouds, water, you know, physical stuff.

Somebody else made those?

that's always been something of a tough spot for them. luckily, they don't have to worry about petty things like consistency or making sense.


a brief version of paley's argument for design:

suppose you are out walking on the heath and amongst the plants and rocks and dirt and such you see a watch. you pick up a handful of dirt and say "wow, look at this! it clearly must be the work of a designer..." wait, no not that.

ok, i've got it. you pick up the watch and say "this thing sure is complex and intricate, unlike those plants and rocks and such next to it. it must have been designed by an intelligent being, unlike those plants and rocks and dirt and whatnot..." no, wait, that's wrong too.

well anyway, the watch stands out as different from everything else, and that's how we know that the rock next to it was designed. obviously. its really quite simple, you see?

Will my appendix do something in hell? ;)

It will slowly inflate.

I've always wondered what the intelligent design explanation for the appendix or vestigial tales was.

Tests of our faith? Bureaucratic error?

Like I said before, Intelligent Design is really a crapshoot. They're hoping that the Creator is God. What if it turned out to be The Ancients, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, or even Cthulhu?

Like I said before, Intelligent Design is really a crapshoot. They're hoping that the Creator is God. What if it turned out to be The Ancients, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, or even Cthulhu?

They're really gonna freak when they find out that God is a Voodoo Shaman from the planet Ganja.

They're really gonna freak when they find out that God is a Voodoo Shaman from the planet Ganja.

Not to mention he's the creator and leader of the Rastafarian Ninja Team, Ganjaman.

that's always been something of a tough spot for them. luckily, they don't have to worry about petty things like consistency or making sense.


a brief version of paley's argument for design:

suppose you are out walking on the heath and amongst the plants and rocks and dirt and such you see a watch. you pick up a handful of dirt and say "wow, look at this! it clearly must be the work of a designer..." wait, no not that.

ok, i've got it. you pick up the watch and say "this thing sure is complex and intricate, unlike those plants and rocks and such next to it. it must have been designed by an intelligent being, unlike those plants and rocks and dirt and whatnot..." no, wait, that's wrong too.

well anyway, the watch stands out as different from everything else, and that's how we know that the rock next to it was designed. obviously. its really quite simple, you see?

Maybe the term complexity has to be better defined. Still to return to my original question - is the ID crowd different from creationists, since creationists want to find the "Supreme Creator" whereas IDist just want the "Life Giver"? Like a downgraded version of God?

Based on their central idea, the story goes like this:

1. The non-complex, utterly mundane parts of the Universe (like whole galaxies and nebulas meh) are made by some creator/process/whatever. Not important. And who wasn't an intelligent designer because simple physical stuff are not complex.

2. Then the intelligent designer suddenly appears and life is created. Voila!

It's di-deism. Me likes! :D

Maybe the term complexity has to be better defined. Still to return to my original question - is the ID crowd different from creationists, since creationists want to find the "Supreme Creator" whereas IDist just want the "Life Giver"? Like a downgraded version of God?

Based on their central idea, the story goes like this:

1. The non-complex, utterly mundane parts of the Universe (like whole galaxies and nebulas meh) are made by some creator/process/whatever. Not important. And who wasn't an intelligent designer because simple physical stuff are not complex.

2. Then the intelligent designer suddenly appears and life is created. Voila!

It's di-deism. Me likes! :D
They are the same group. ID is just made to sound better and more sciencey than creationism, that's all. It is the same belief with a different candy coating.

The human body is proof that there was no "intelligent" designer, whatsoever.

The human body is proof that there was no "intelligent" designer, whatsoever.

You've never seen me naked. Perfection.











Except for the hump and goiter.

You've never seen me naked. Perfection.











Except for the hump and goiter.

I daresay, Ive never seen a hawter goiter.

And Ive seen a loooot of goiters, my friend.

I mean, the dudes off in Kansas aren't claiming that aliens made them, they're trying to put the Fun of Fundamentalism into their school system.
But in reality all they're doing is putting the Mental of Fundamentalism into their school system.

Maybe the designer's supervisor was on his back about being behind with his performance targets so he rushed off a few things that were easy.

Maybe the designer's supervisor was on his back about being behind with his performance targets so he rushed off a few things that were easy.


Like:

The brain.

The sinus cavities.

The spine.

the digestive system....

Etc...

I've been highly skeptical about "intelligent design" ever since noticing that the air tube (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trachea) and food tube (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esophagus) both open into the same tube (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larynx). Thus, attempts to maximize efficiency in an intelligent manner by eating/drinking and breathing at the same time necessarily fail. Seems like poor engineering to me.

(Therefore, dolphins and whales are clearly the descendents of supernatural beings.)

Like:

The brain.

The sinus cavities.

The spine.

the digestive system....

Etc...

...and irony

Intelligent Design is a double-edged swords that Fundies don't know are pointed the wrong way either. What if human life on Earth really was planted by a sentient being, but what if it wasn't God... but say if we're lucky The Ancients, and if not The Great Old Ones?

That'd be cool. Imagine if some couple decades down the line a great big alien ship appears over Earth and they broadcast to the world "Greetings bipedal sentients of experiment B-352. We are pleased to see you have made it this far but rather put out at your implication that it was some other being that made you."

Fundies everywhere would have a heart attack.

That'd be cool. Imagine if some couple decades down the line a great big alien ship appears over Earth and they broadcast to the world "Greetings bipedal sentients of experiment B-352. We are pleased to see you have made it this far but rather put out at your implication that it was some other being that made you."

Fundies everywhere would have a heart attack.

That would be the acid test of the purported difference between ID and creationism.

The ID people should say "yay! It was the aliens!"

Creationists should say "fuck it wasn't Yahweh."

Unless they are in fact the same crowd.

I'll be there selling ice cream as usual.

Intelligent Design is a double-edged swords that Fundies don't know are pointed the wrong way either. What if human life on Earth really was planted by a sentient being, but what if it wasn't God... but say if we're lucky The Ancients, and if not The Great Old Ones?

All fear the true creator!

http://www.hello-cthulhu.com/images/comics/en/017.gif

1. The non-complex, utterly mundane parts of the Universe


Sounds like Kansas to me

Maybe the term complexity has to be better defined. Still to return to my original question - is the ID crowd different from creationists, since creationists want to find the "Supreme Creator" whereas IDist just want the "Life Giver"? Like a downgraded version of God?

Based on their central idea, the story goes like this:

1. The non-complex, utterly mundane parts of the Universe (like whole galaxies and nebulas meh) are made by some creator/process/whatever. Not important. And who wasn't an intelligent designer because simple physical stuff are not complex.

2. Then the intelligent designer suddenly appears and life is created. Voila!

It's di-deism. Me likes! :D


Nothing about ID suggests a separation of 'physical stuff' and 'life'.
ID just does not claim the 'physical stuff' is evidence of anything on it's own.

I'm not even a proponent of ID, but I could almost make a career out of rebutting weak or flat out wrong attacks on it.
:p

My argument against ID has always been that... have you ever LOOKED at our world? The creatures, our own bodies? Only an idiot could have designed this.


I agree!

Nothing about ID suggests a separation of 'physical stuff' and 'life'.
ID just does not claim the 'physical stuff' is evidence of anything on it's own.

I'm not even a proponent of ID, but I could almost make a career out of rebutting weak or flat out wrong attacks on it.
:p

Explain? :confused:

I was saying ID does not explain physical stuff. It is incorrect in what way?:confused:

My argument against ID has always been that... have you ever LOOKED at our world? The creatures, our own bodies? Only an idiot could have designed this.


You could do better?

I agree!

You agree?

Have you ever seen how complicated your circulatory system is?

There have been several ID thereads lately and this is the fist i've replyed to.

let me start off by saying that no matter what reasons people give i allways have a deep down feeling that, as my sig says, ID theory is just:

"an opt out of science because it [science] is too hard to understand"

I also want to point out that evolution does hapen. take MRSA for example: random mutation and gene exchange produced that not and intelegent designer.

Maybe the designer's supervisor was on his back about being behind with his performance targets so he rushed off a few things that were easy.

One of my favorite bits from Small Gods, by Terry Pratchett:

People said there had to be a Supreme Being because otherwise how could the universe exist, eh?
And of course there clearly had to be, said Koomi, a Supreme Being. But since the universe was a bit of a mess, it was obvious the Supreme Being hadn't in fact made it. If he had made it he would, being Supreme, have made a much better job of it, with far better thought given, taking an example at random, to things like design of the common nostril. Or, to put it another way, the existence of a badly put together watch proved the existence of a blind watchmaker. You only had to look around to see that there was room for improvement practically everywhere.
This suggests that the Universe had probably been put together in a bit of a rush by an underling while the Supreme Being wasn't looking, in the same way that Boy Scouts' Association minutes are done on office photocopiers all over the country.
So, reasoned Koomi, it was not a good idea to address any prayer to a Supreme Being. It would only attract his attention and might cause trouble.

So the hypothesis of ID is that any complex system has be designed by an intelligent agent, right?

What about non-living things like boulders, clouds, water, you know, physical stuff.

Somebody else made those?

When I argue that universe is designed by some intelligent consciousness, it means everything from clouds to lizards to stars have been designed by it. Believing in ID doesnt necessarily mean that GOD put humans on Earth just like we are today after days of creation.

Explain? :confused:

I was saying ID does not explain physical stuff. It is incorrect in what way?:confused:


ID doesn't attempt to explain physical stuff.

Same as Evolution does not attempt to explain the Big Bang or anything like it.

So the hypothesis of ID is that any complex system has be designed by an intelligent agent, right?

What about non-living things like boulders, clouds, water, you know, physical stuff.

Somebody else made those?


Not to play devil's advocate or anything, and just to make sure you all know this up front, I think ID is a theory with so many flaws and so paradoxical to the extreme that it collapses under its own weight...

but atoms are pretty darn complex too, when you get right down to it. Who is to say that if some hypothetical designer was doing life, she didn't also do the very complicated atom which we can't duplicate either.

My argument against ID has always been that... have you ever LOOKED at our world? The creatures, our own bodies? Only an idiot could have designed this.
Or as George Carlin puts it:

If this is the best God can do, I'm not impressed. Results like these do not belong on the resume of a supreme being. This is the kind of stuff you'd expect from an office temp with a bad attitude. In any well-managed universe, this guy would have been out on his all-powerful ass a long time ago.

Maybe the term complexity has to be better defined. Still to return to my original question - is the ID crowd different from creationists, since creationists want to find the "Supreme Creator" whereas IDist just want the "Life Giver"? Like a downgraded version of God?

nah, because the conclusion to their stupid analogy is "you know what else is complex? the universe as a whole. therefore there is a universe creator."

I mean, duck billed platypusses? Platypi? They've got poisonous ankle spurs! Was God drunk that day?

I mean, duck billed platypusses? Platypi? They've got poisonous ankle spurs! Was God drunk that day?
He was high. God created plants and man created beer. If anything God would use his own creation for his benefit.

He was high. God created plants and man created beer. If anything God would use his own creation for his benefit.
Ah, but on the other side, Benjamin Franklin said that beer was proof that God exists and wants us to be happy. But I still think this Creation wouldn't pass muster in a real peer review.

Intelligent Design is a double-edged swords that Fundies don't know are pointed the wrong way either. What if human life on Earth really was planted by a sentient being, but what if it wasn't God... but say if we're lucky The Ancients, and if not The Great Old Ones?

Not only that, but who designed them?

Not only that, but who designed them?

And who designed them, and so on and so forth. The answer eventually leads to a paradox in which penguins, using time travel, designed god.

And who designed them, and so on and so forth. The answer eventually leads to a paradox in which penguins, using time travel, designed god.

Fascinating.

And who designed them, and so on and so forth. The answer eventually leads to a paradox in which penguins, using time travel, designed god.

I knew my penguin-worshipping wouldn't come to be worthless.