Intelligent Design

[ShivanCommander]

Hello, just seeing what everyone's thoughts are on intelligent design. Intelligent design is the idea that life and the universe were created by a highly sophisticated entity known as the intelligent designer, or intelligent agent. This intelligent designer then created the universe to it's own specifications and created life in it. It's a non-religious view on creationism and the origins of man, as opposed to evolution and natural selection. What are your thoughts on intelligent design?

More Info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design

 

[PLC1]

Hello, just seeing what everyone's thoughts are on intelligent design. Intelligent design is the idea that life and the universe were created by a highly sophisticated entity known as the intelligent designer, or intelligent agent. This intelligent designer then created the universe to it's own specifications and created life in it. It's a non-religious view on creationism and the origins of man, as opposed to evolution and natural selection. What are your thoughts on intelligent design?

More Info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design

A century and a half of scientific research has proven conclusively that life on Earth evolved from simple to ever more complex organisms.

It has not proven whether an intelligent designer started the ball rolling by creating the first organisms and was behind evolution by tweaking it occasionally to achieve a desired result, however.

Evolution is science, intelligent design is philosophy.

 

[Gipper]

A century and a half of scientific research has proven conclusively that life on Earth evolved from simple to ever more complex organisms.

It has not proven whether an intelligent designer started the ball rolling by creating the first organisms and was behind evolution by tweaking it occasionally to achieve a desired result, however.

Evolution is science, intelligent design is philosophy.

Wrong. Even bacteria which likely were the first living organisms, are very complex. Evolution is an unproven theory, but don't let the facts get in your way. You haven't yet.

And, the intelligent designer you refer to Mr. Commander, is generally called GOD.

 

[PLC1]

Wrong. Even bacteria which likely were the first living organisms, are very complex. Evolution is an unproven theory, but don't let the facts get in your way. You haven't yet.

"Unproven theory" is an oxymoron.

Theory: A theory is what one or more hypotheses become once they have been verified and accepted to be true. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. Unfortunately, even some scientists often use the term "theory" in a more colloquial sense, when they really mean to say "hypothesis." That makes its true meaning in science even more confusing to the general public.

A theory has to be proven in order to be a theory.

And, the intelligent designer you refer to Mr. Commander, is generally called GOD.

Yes, I think god is the term generally used. Your point is????

 

[Gipper]

Yes...but you believe a theory is fact. Why?

 

[PLC1]

Yes...but you believe a theory is fact. Why?

Read the link, then get back to me.

it is not "just a theory", but a "scientific theory."

Again, read the link. the term "unproven theory" is an oxymoron. There is no such thing.

\

 

[Gipper]

A century and a half of scientific research has proven conclusively that life on Earth evolved from simple to ever more complex organisms. .

Here is what you stated. Is this not claiming that evolution is FACT?

It is not a fact and it has not been proven conclusively. So, again you are wrong.

 

[PLC1]

Here is what you stated. Is this not claiming that evolution is FACT?

It is not a fact and it has not been proven conclusively. So, again you are wrong.

I asked you to check my link before responding, and it appears that you did not.

There is no such thing as an unproven theory, not in science. Evolution is accepted as fact.

 

[Gipper]

I asked you to check my link before responding, and it appears that you did not.

There is no such thing as an unproven theory, not in science. Evolution is accepted as fact.

I know there is no such thing as an unproven theory.

And, I know that evolution is NOT an accepted fact except by p-school teachers and even retired ones.

 

[PLC1]

I know there is no such thing as an unproven theory.

And, I know that evolution is NOT an accepted fact except by p-school teachers and even retired ones.

Now, you really have me confused.

First, you post:

Evolution is an unproven theory,

Now, you're saying

I know there is no such thing as an unproven theory.

Maybe I've finally managed to get you to accept a scientific fact, except that then you say:

And, I know that evolution is NOT an accepted fact except by p-school teachers and even retired ones.

So, now evolution is not an unproven theory after all, since there is no such thing, and it is a scientific theory, therefore, it is proven. Except that the proven theory is not accepted except by teachers.

 

[nobull]

"Unproven theory" is an oxymoron.



A theory has to be proven in order to be a theory.



Yes, I think god is the term generally used. Your point is????

Scientific Law: This is a statement of fact meant to describe, in concise terms, an action or set of actions. It is generally accepted to be true and universal, and can sometimes be expressed in terms of a single mathematical equation. Scientific laws are similar to mathematical postulates. They don’t really need any complex external proofs; they are accepted at face value based upon the fact that they have always been observed to be true.

NOT ALWAYS.. and not by most...

regards
doug

 

[Gipper]

Now, you really have me confused.

That happens every day I suspect.

And, now you try to hide behind my mistake, which I admitted was wrong.

You stated Evolution was a fact. As usual you are wrong. Can you be man enough to admit it?

 

[PLC1]

That happens every day I suspect.

And, now you try to hide behind my mistake, which I admitted was wrong.

You stated Evolution was a fact. As usual you are wrong. Can you be man enough to admit it?

I said:

A century and a half of scientific research has proven conclusively that life on Earth evolved from simple to ever more complex organisms.

Evolution is a scientific theory, and has, by definition, been proven. I did not use the word "fact."

But I'm still confused: Was it a mistake to have said that evolution was an "unproven theory", or to have admitted that a theory is by definition proven?

 

[Dr.Who]

"Unproven theory" is an oxymoron.



A theory has to be proven in order to be a theory.



Yes, I think god is the term generally used. Your point is????

A theory is not considered to be proven. Your source is simply wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory

 

[Dr.Who]

A century and a half of scientific research has proven conclusively that life on Earth evolved from simple to ever more complex organisms.

It has not proven whether an intelligent designer started the ball rolling by creating the first organisms and was behind evolution by tweaking it occasionally to achieve a desired result, however.

Evolution is science, intelligent design is philosophy.

I do believe in evolution but I do admit it has not been proven in the way that many people think it has. There is strong evidence for it but so far there is no example of any single species having evolved from one species into another in the way that evolution describes it.

There are mice that become other mice. But they did not become another species.

There are entirely different species of plants that have cross bred
and created a new species over the course of a few years.

There are lots of examples of species adapting and changing and becoming more fit. But none have been observed to become another species slowly over long periods of time as a result of selection of the fittest.

Plasticity within a species accounts for much of the change people see in the record. In other words a small horse becomes large and its feet become hooves but the genetic material is still present within the species and it could still become small with feet again.