|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
 Posted - 01/18/2008 : 21:39:51 [Permalink]
|
| Jesus. What's miserable is that by post 23, a guy "BarryA" asks what "Darwinism predicts" and the following answers are nothing but caricatures of actual evolutionary science! The whole thread-- from Dembski's almost pathetic "I have my own list of answers, but I'd like to hear those of this group" to the utterly ignorant posts from his followers-- would be comical if it didn't make me depressed. |
 |
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
Posted - 01/18/2008 : 21:42:32 [Permalink]
|
| Oh, I forgot to mention that Dembski published his post four days ago - and he still hasn't published his list. |
METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL
It's a small, off-duty czechoslovakian traffic warden! |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 01/18/2008 : 21:49:11 [Permalink]
|
Holy shit. I think that this one takes the cake:| Evolution cannot adequately explain why various species supposedly evolve similar organs and forms without any evolutionary relationship between the species. If mutation is the origin of novel organs and limbs etc, then why does mutation seem to create similar organs and limbs in species without any evolutionary relationship between them? Not only are we expected to believe that random mutation can build computer coded nanotechnology (far surpassing anything we can design, for example cold fusion in plants) as well as flight technology superior to anything we can design, swimming technology superior to anything we can design, and on and on, but we are also expected to believe that random mutation can build the same type of technology over and over. |
In other words, the fact that, for instance, the eye has evolved several different times in several different ways is now evidence of a designer.  |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2008 : 00:35:30 [Permalink]
|
This is so much fun. Any creo batshit nutbag is allowed to post answers to the questions, and not one has even tried.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Maverick
Skeptic Friend
Sweden
385 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2008 : 01:59:54 [Permalink]
|
ID predicts nothing, is based on no evidence and really, is there even an hypothesis? Some say ID is about biology, while others say it's about the whole cosmos. The whole idea with ID is of course to make people think that religious beliefs and other sorts of similar beliefs are actually on equal level with actual scientific hypotheses. It's also very inclusive and culture-sensitive since the proponents always make it clear that the theory says nothing about the designer. I think it's the idea that any sort of unbased faith is better than evidencebased science. As long as people believe, the easier they can be kept in line.
Do the leaders of the ID movement understand that what they're selling is rubbish? I suspect they do, and in that case they know that real scientists know it's rubbish. What they hope for is that enough people don't understand it's unscientific rubbish... and in many cases they are right. There are lots of people who think that they can pick and choose the reality in which to believe. If they don't like what the theory of evolution says (or more often the strawman version of it), then they can disregard it. Maybe they don't want to imagine a universe without the watered down version of Biblegod, no problem, all they have to do is believe. Evidence and observed reality be damned if it doesn't add up to their favourite fantasies. |
"Life is but a momentary glimpse of the wonder of this astonishing universe, and it is sad to see so many dreaming it away on spiritual fantasy." -- Carl Sagan |
| Edited by - Maverick on 01/20/2008 02:01:18 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2008 : 02:23:01 [Permalink]
|
Maverick asked:
| Do the leaders of the ID movement understand that what they're selling is rubbish? |
I'd have to say they are fully aware of what they are doing because I have a problem imagining anyone capable of forming a sentence being stupid enough to believe what they are selling.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2008 : 09:58:06 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
This is so much fun. Any creo batshit nutbag is allowed to post answers to the questions, and not one has even tried. |
Not even Dembski. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2008 : 10:26:58 [Permalink]
|
Doctor Doctor is hoping someone has a clue. If they did, he'd jump in, congratulate the poster, and claim that was his idea.
But, of course, nobody has, or will, or can. There's random noise, but no signal in that thread. The utter lack of any known ID predictions comes damned near to "disproving" ID -- except for the fact that ID remains an undefined, unfalsifiable conjecture. Kinda like a religious belief.
I've got an idea: Somebody should post a "prediction" that ID will remain unfalsifiable. Those people are probably dumb enough to think that's a good thing.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2008 : 16:21:11 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Hawks
Well, well, seems that the ID crowd might officially release a list of not only ID predictions, but even ID predictions that have been determined to be true. Says Dembski regarding a request from a radio show considering interviewing him or Wells:
| I have my own list of answers, but I'd like to hear those of this group. |
There are a couple of things about Dembski's post that are funny:
1. The guy has a list that he has been keeing secret up until now. Can't wait to see it.
2. ...
|
Seems reasonable to me that if ID were capable of making predictions, then a couple of years ago they could have received some grant money from the Templeton Foundation.
A New York Times article said the foundation asked intelligent design proponents to submit proposals for actual research and quoted Charles L. Harper Jr., senior vice president at the Templeton Foundation, as saying "They never came in" and that while he was skeptical from the beginning, other foundation officials were initially intrigued and later grew disillusioned.
|
Later seeing ID and ID proponents for what they really are.
The Templeton Foundation has since rejected the Discovery Institute's entreaties for more funding, Harper stated. "They're political - that for us is problematic", and that while Discovery has "always claimed to be focused on the science", "what I see is much more focused on public policy, on public persuasion, on educational advocacy and so forth".
|
Still no science. Imagine that.  |
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
|
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2008 : 21:23:47 [Permalink]
|
And now Denyse O'Leary is chiming in. According to her, ID predicts (among other things):| Complete series of transitional fossils will not usually be found because most proposed series have never existed. |
The ID claim is that evolution can't explain gaps in the fossil record. She seems to be totally unaware that that automatically means that ID predicts that there should be such gaps is an obvious and blatant logical fallacy.
...
Go, Denyse.
...
Go, ID. |
METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL
It's a small, off-duty czechoslovakian traffic warden! |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2008 : 08:50:24 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Hawks
And now Denyse O'Leary is chiming in. |
And in the comments, corn patiently explains the the separation between science and ethics, and Denyse comes back with this:"Science" is about killing kids and "philosophy" is about the oddd views of people who are upset by the fact that one does it? Now that is "depth."
Oh, she also said, up in the "predictions" (number 9)Information is passed on from mind to mind, not through genes or physiology. She has thus undermined the alleged "law of conservation of information" argument for why DNA cannot be beneficially mutated. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2008 : 17:40:10 [Permalink]
|
 |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
 |
|
ID predicts.......
