RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (6) < 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 >   
  Topic: Understanding Intelligent Design In Plain Language, Dr Dr Dembski has a new book out.< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,07:57   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,July 01 2008,07:49)
Who wants to bet Mr McDowell doesn't 'understand intelligent design'?

He clearly understands the most important principle that guides the ID movement - write books so that you can make money from the rubes!

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
                        - Pattiann Rogers

   
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,08:17   

First chapter available for free
/UnderstandingID.pdf

What's the very first substantial bit of text in it?
 
Quote
Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are taken from the New American Standard Bible ®,
© 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission.
(www.Lockman.org)
Verses marked nlt are taken from the Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright ©1996. Used by permission
of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Wheaton, IL 60189 USA. All rights reserved.
Verses marked niv are taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION ®. NIV ®. Copyright
© 1973, 1978, 1984 by the International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved.


Now, why would a book about ID have bible quotes?

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,08:23   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ July 01 2008,14:17)
First chapter available for free
/UnderstandingID.pdf

What's the very first substantial bit of text in it?
   
Quote
Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are taken from the New American Standard Bible ®,
© 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission.
(www.Lockman.org)
Verses marked nlt are taken from the Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright ©1996. Used by permission
of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Wheaton, IL 60189 USA. All rights reserved.
Verses marked niv are taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION ®. NIV ®. Copyright
© 1973, 1978, 1984 by the International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved.


Now, why would a book about ID have bible quotes?

Well it can't be because ID is about religion because almost everyone tells us it isn't about religion. Must be for some other reason like ID being all about religion or something.

{blech}

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,09:18   

Quote
Contrary to what naturalistic thought would expect, these very first photosynthetic bacteria scientists find in the geologic and fossil record are shown to have been preparing the earth for more advanced life to appear from the very start of their existence by reducing the greenhouse gases of earth’s early atmosphere and producing the necessary oxygen for higher life-forms to exist.


Who knew?

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-291740

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Jim_Wynne



Posts: 1208
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,09:38   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ July 01 2008,08:17)
First chapter available for free
/UnderstandingID.pdf

What's the very first substantial bit of text in it?
   
Quote
Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are taken from the New American Standard Bible ®,
© 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission.
(www.Lockman.org)
Verses marked nlt are taken from the Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright ©1996. Used by permission
of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Wheaton, IL 60189 USA. All rights reserved.
Verses marked niv are taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION ®. NIV ®. Copyright
© 1973, 1978, 1984 by the International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved.


Now, why would a book about ID have bible quotes?

Dembski also does the obligatory "Wah Wah Dover, Wah Wah Judge Jones" in the excerpt:
Quote
Jones’s main distinction before being appointed a federal judge was to serve as chairman of the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board. As neither a scientist nor a scholar, he was ill-equipped to preside over this case. It won’t be the last on intelligent design.


In other words, "We were run over by a bus, and another one will be along soon and we'll jump in front of it, too."

--------------
Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,09:42   

Quote (Jim_Wynne @ July 01 2008,09:38)
Dembski also does the obligatory "Wah Wah Dover, Wah Wah Judge Jones" in the excerpt:
   
Quote
Jones’s main distinction before being appointed a federal judge was to serve as chairman of the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board. As neither a scientist nor a scholar, he was ill-equipped to preside over this case. It won’t be the last on intelligent design.


In other words, "We were run over by a bus, and another one will be along soon and we'll jump in front of it, too."

Actually a more accurate translation from the demsbkian dialect would be "We'll keep trying until we get a judge as stupid as we are."

Which could happen...

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
                        - Pattiann Rogers

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4991
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,10:17   

At the next IDC trial involving the use of "The Design of Life" by some deluded teacher, I look forward to Dembski being called by the plaintiffs as a hostile witness.

Oh, and Wells, too.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
lcd



Posts: 137
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,10:30   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ July 01 2008,10:17)
At the next IDC trial involving the use of "The Design of Life" by some deluded teacher, I look forward to Dembski being called by the plaintiffs as a hostile witness.

Oh, and Wells, too.

Does "deluded teacher" mean to you when applied to ID as someone who was, "pressured to teach something they feel is very wrong, got fired and they are now suing a hostile work environment"?

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,10:37   

LCD don't you think a teacher should be able to teach dispassionately things they disagree with?

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,10:39   

I feel the alphabet theory of word construction is wrong and it is immoral to teach it since the bible tells us that God Gave Us Teh Word.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4991
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,10:44   

Quote

Does "deluded teacher" mean to you when applied to ID as someone who was, "pressured to teach something they feel is very wrong, got fired and they are now suing a hostile work environment"?


I'm afraid that doesn't parse easily, but it appears that the answer is, "No."

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Lou FCD



Posts: 5455
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,10:54   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ July 01 2008,11:17)
At the next IDC trial involving the use of "The Design of Life" by some deluded teacher, I look forward to Dembski being called by the plaintiffs as a hostile witness.

Oh, and Wells, too.

Could you put a bug in someone's ear about video for the next one?  The plaintiffs should really push hard for that, for documentary, evidential, and educational purposes.

--------------
“Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas?

Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4991
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,10:58   

I'll try. Judge Jones has, IIRC, commented that he now regrets not allowing video coverage of the KvD trial.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,10:58   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ July 01 2008,10:44)
Quote

Does "deluded teacher" mean to you when applied to ID as someone who was, "pressured to teach something they feel is very wrong, got fired and they are now suing a hostile work environment"?


I'm afraid that doesn't parse easily, but it appears that the answer is, "No."

Why would a teacher be fired simply for being pressured to teach something? Maybe the intended meaning was that the teacher taught something contrary to the curriculum.

So would it be a hostile work environment that fires a math teacher for teaching that pi equals three?

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5455
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,11:04   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ July 01 2008,11:58)
I'll try. Judge Jones has, IIRC, commented that he now regrets not allowing video coverage of the KvD trial.

Thanks, Wesley.  The sane world would benefit greatly, I'm sure.

...and I'm quite sure that Judge Jones is not the only one who regrets that.

The IDCH hucksters however, probably thank the Disembodied Telic Entity every single night for it.  And if they don't, they should.

EDITED:  My grammar, she suckethed.

Edited by Lou FCD on July 01 2008,12:05

--------------
“Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas?

Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

   
Quidam



Posts: 229
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,11:10   

Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,09:30)
Does "deluded teacher" mean to you when applied to ID as someone who was, "pressured to teach something they feel is very wrong, got fired and they are now suing a hostile work environment"?

A history teacher fired for teaching holocaust denial.  
A physics teacher fired for teaching the earth is 6,500 years old
A Social Studies teacher fired for teaching the 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion'
A Biology teacher fired for teaching creationism

All may well strongly believe their delusions, but that does not permit them to teach these delusions.  If their delusions prevent them from teaching the curriculum then they need to find another career.

--------------
The organized fossils ... and their localities also, may be understood by all, even the most illiterate. William Smith, Strata. 1816

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,12:19   

Quote
A history teacher fired for teaching holocaust denial.  
A physics teacher fired for teaching the earth is 6,500 years old
A Social Studies teacher fired for teaching the 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion'


Damn. You've just prescribed permanent unemployment for the majority of creationists and cdesign proponentsists.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,12:19   

But you left out HIV denial.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Chayanov



Posts: 289
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,12:40   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ July 01 2008,10:39)
I feel the alphabet theory of word construction is wrong and it is immoral to teach it since the bible tells us that God Gave Us Teh Word.

It's also immoral to learn other languages, because God created different languages at Babel so that different groups of people wouldn't be able to communicate with each other.

--------------
Help! Marxist literary critics are following me!

  
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:43   

Isn't Beckwith's endorsement just as left handed as possible?

Quote
“Intelligent Design is often rejected, but rarely understood, especially by those who incessantly tell the rest of us to keep an “open mind.” This is an age when sophisticated academics do not flinch at requiring public school students to watch “sex education” demonstrations that involve bananas and condoms. Yet these same intellectuals insist that our children be shielded from any literature that may cast doubts on materialism. This is why ID advocates would face less resistance in our more cerebral venues if someone somewhere would just label it as pornography. But, alas, that has not happened. So, you’ll just have to discover by your lonesome self what gets Richard Dawkins’ panties in a bunch. Start by reading this book and learning something. If you wind up disagreeing with portions of it or even the whole thing, that’s okay, for many of us (me included) have issues with and questions about ID as well. But some of us are far more suspicious of the thought-police that want to ‘protect you’ from this new boogey man.”
–Francis J. Beckwith, Professor of Philosophy and Church-State Studies, Baylor University


I think Dr. Dr. wanted something a little more positive and Frank offered to meet in the Baylor cafeteria to discuss it... Instead he got
Quote
“Intelligent Design is often rejected...If you wind up disagreeing with portions of it or even the whole thing, that’s okay.”
–Francis J. Beckwith, Professor of Philosophy and Church-State Studies, Baylor University


with an erotic subtext of bananas and condoms meeting resistance in the panties of a cerebral professor. Just the thing to sell copies to the Josh McDowell crowd.

--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,13:49   

If the Intelligent Designer hadn't wanted bananas used in classroom condom demonstrations, He wouldn't have made the fruit fit the hand so irreducibly.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Texas Teach



Posts: 2084
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,14:19   

Quote
This is an age when sophisticated academics do not flinch at requiring public school students to watch “sex education” demonstrations that involve bananas and condoms.


Teach the con(dom)troversy!

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin

  
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,15:16   

Dr. Dr. hasn't fooled the Library of Congress

Quote
1. Intelligent design (Teleology) 2. Creationism. 3. Evolution (Biology)—Religious aspects—Christianity.


--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

  
Quidam



Posts: 229
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,15:22   


Ray Comfort teaches the condomtroversy

Bananas are frisky things, be safe - always use a condom.

--------------
The organized fossils ... and their localities also, may be understood by all, even the most illiterate. William Smith, Strata. 1816

  
Venus Mousetrap



Posts: 201
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,16:08   

That sample chapter is quite laughworthy, but it adds nothing new. It's basically 'Darwinism is replacing christianity and destroying faith, and ID is the answer to how you can keep your faith but it's not about religion. Also we're being oppressed.'

Dembski (assuming those bits are his) seems to have a knack for very eloquently putting forward the other side's good arguments, and then trying to refute them with his made up crap. I mean, normally I have a little patience for religion and spirituality, but Dembski clearly lays it out: if what the Darwinists are true, Christianity is WRONG WRONG WRONG. He's putting that dichotomy there himself, and the only thing that he's holding people onto his side with is his made-up scam of a theory. This seems to me to be a very fragile position to put his readers in, because as soon as they realise the nonsense he's offering on his side, the other is going to look exactly as inviting as he says it is.

  
ReligionProf



Posts: 33
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,22:31   

What I thought was funniest is that this book, explaining in plain language about intelligent design, which is supposedly all about science and nothing to do with religion, has a foreword by a well-known conservative Christian apologist.

I guess they're right. It doesn't get much plainer than that! :)

--------------
http://www.patheos.com/communi....rmatrix

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 01 2008,22:47   

The Jolly green Giant's posterior on the cover may be an allusion to DrDrD's new title, The Dick ButtKiss of Intelligent Design.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 02 2008,09:50   

So somehow I get fundie spam in my yahoo mailbox.  That's what I get for surfing creo-tard on promiscuous sites.  But sometimes lately there has been some funny shit.  I don't care enough to go through this and it would be like cutting up the mona lisa for cleaning up dog shit.  There are some real howlers in here though.  My favorite,

Quote
Just as we “fine-tune” a shower in the morning to make it tolerable, the entire universe is fine-tuned to support human life.


I just imagined this douchebag preaching without a space suit while orbiting the moon.  Fuck You Sean McDowell You Ignorant Liar.
Quote
Posted: 07/01/2008
Understanding Intelligent Design
Worldview with Sean McDowell

Where did we come from? Why are we here? How did life as we know it come about? Are we accidental by-products of a purposeless, dark, and cold universe (as Darwinian evolution teaches)? Or are we the pinnacle of creation by a loving God? In other words: Is the world a cosmic fluke? Or is the universe the handiwork of personal God? Few questions, it would seem, are more important than these.
If you’ve taken Biology 101, visited a museum lately, or watched a recent Discovery Channel documentary you’ve probably heard that the evidence for evolution is overwhelming. University Professor Francis Ayala recently said, “Scientists agree that the evolutionary origin of animals and plants is a scientific conclusion beyond reasonable doubt.”[1]
This idea shows up frequently in popular television shows, too. For example, in a Friends episode Phoebe and Ross discuss the merits of Darwinian evolution. Shocked to find that Phoebe rejects it, Ross says, “Uh, excuse me. Evolution is not for you to buy, Phoebe. Evolution is scientific fact, like, like, like the air we breathe, like gravity.” If you look closely, you’ll also find Darwinism being taught in the children’s movie Lilo and Stitch and in a recent episode of The Family Guy. The take-home lesson is simple: smart people are supposed to believe in evolution, and only fools believe the world was designed by God.
         
The Underwhelming Evidence for Evolution
           Despite the common claim that evolution is duly supported by the evidence, the facts show otherwise. A growing number of leading scholars (with Ph.D.s from top secular universities) are questioning the merits of Darwin’s theory. For starters, while there is plenty of evidence for microevolution (small changes within a species) there is no compelling evidence for macroevolution (the theory that all of life descended from one common ancestor through random mutation and natural selection).
In science class today, the word “evolution” refers to Darwinian macroevolution, not microevolution. Nevertheless, it is amazing how many people confuse the evidence for microevolution with evidence for macroevolution. After a Newsweek article on evolution, one respondent wrote in to the editor in defense of Darwinism: “They say there’s no evidence for evolution. Yet there it is within my own lifetime. My older sister was one of the patients saved by the new wonder drug penicillin, which probably couldn’t save her now because microbes have evolved to the point that penicillin can’t kill them anymore. That’s fact, not theory—evidence that life forms can change over time.”[2]
           Can you spot the confusion? While she offers evidence for microevolution, her example is irrelevant to the grand claims of Darwinism. If, in order to beat the antibiotic, the bacteria had evolved into jellyfish, that would be evidence for Darwin’s theory. But no such transition has ever been observed in either the lab or in the fossil record. Much of the evidence that supposedly supports Darwinian evolution—the Peppered Moths, Darwin’s finches, HIV mutations, and more—only support microevolution. The move from these examples to Darwinism is a blind leap of faith.
           To be fair, there are other “evidences” offered by Darwinists to support their theory. Just check out your school textbook. But these have problems, too. For a more in-depth treatment of the myths of evolution, see my recent book Understanding Intelligent Design (co-written with William Dembski). You will love our analysis of the fossil record!

The Case for Design
           Not only are there insurmountable problems for Darwinism, there is also powerful case to be made that the world bears the marks of a Designer.  Scientists are just recently finding evidence to support the claim King David made roughly 3,000 years ago—that the world reveals knowledge about God (Psalm 19:1-2). Consider two examples:

1. The Design of DNA. If you came across a message in the sand that read, “John Loves Mary,” what would you conclude caused it? Was it the result of wind, erosion, and waves? Or is it best explained as the work of an intelligent agent? The answer is obvious—a mind did it. The laws of nature simply can’t account for a message of this sort.
           Since its discovery in 1953, scientists have realized that the DNA inside a cell carries information for the production of proteins. In fact, it’s been estimated that one cell in the human body has the equivalent of 8,000 books of information! Ordinary experience tells us that information, such as a book or computer program, comes from an intelligent source, such as that of an author or computer programmer. Information points beyond itself to an information-giver. Just as the message “John Loves Mary” points beyond itself to an author, the information in the human body points beyond itself to a Designer.
           This evidence is so compelling that it even persuaded the most influential atheist of the past fifty years! Antony Flew spent most of his life arguing that God did not exist. But when he was confronted with the evidence of DNA, he changed his mind. Flew said, “It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design.”[3]

2. The Fine-Tuning of the Universe. Imagine you came across an abandoned cabin in the woods. The temperature was set just as you like it, your favorite music was playing, books by your most beloved author were sitting on the table, new boots just your size were sitting by the door, and the fridge is filled with the snacks, drinks, and desserts you most enjoy. What would you conclude? Most likely, with each new discovery, you would conclude that this home was prepared with you in mind. The cabin, it would seem, was crafted uniquely for you ahead of time.
           In the past few decades, scientists have realized that our universe is just like this cabin—it is crafted perfectly for human existence. In other words, the universe is “fine-tuned” for human life. The conditions that need to be satisfied for the universe to permit human life are so remarkably exact that even very slight variations in these conditions would result in an inhospitable world. Like Little Bear’s porridge, the laws of physics that govern the universe must be “just right.” For example, if the force of gravity were even slightly stronger or weaker, life would be impossible. To be exact, gravity must be fine-tuned to one part in 1040 (that’s one part in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000).[4]
This is only one example of the fine-tuning necessary for human life. Oxford physicist Roger Penrose concluded that if we jointly considered all the laws of nature that must be fine-tuned, we would be unable to write down such an enormous number, since the necessary digits would be greater than the number of elementary particles in the universe![5] Just as we “fine-tune” a shower in the morning to make it tolerable, the entire universe is fine-tuned to support human life.

           There are many more examples of design that could be mentioned. To put it simply: the evidence for design in the natural world is compelling. Learning to see God’s fingerprint in nature will not only help you ward of skeptics who challenge why you believe in God, it will also encourage you profoundly in your personal faith. To help make the scientific case for design understandable, I recently partnered with mathematician and philosopher William Dembski to write, Understanding Intelligent Design: Everything You Need to Know in Plain Language. You can actually download the first chapter for free at: www.conversantlife.com/understandingID.

~ Sean McDowell

[1] Francis Ayala, Darwin’s Gift to Science and Religion (Washington DC: Joseph Henry Press, 2007), 140.
[2] Newsweek, “Letters,” Bev Kaufman (December 20, 2004), 19.
[3] Antony Flew and Gary Habermas, “My Pilgrimage from Atheism to Theism: A Discussion between Antony Flew and Gary Habermas” Philosophia Christi, vol. 6, no. 2, 2004, 201.
[4] Paul Davies, Superforce: The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984), 242.
[5] Roger Penrose, The Emperor’s New Mind (New York: Oxford, 1989), 344.
Distributed by www.ChristianWorldviewNetwork.com


--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 02 2008,14:16   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,July 02 2008,10:50)
 
Quote
Posted: 07/01/2008
Understanding Intelligent Design
Worldview with Sean McDowell


1. The Design of DNA. If you came across a message in the sand that read, “John Loves Mary,” what would you conclude caused it? Was it the result of wind, erosion, and waves? Or is it best explained as the work of an intelligent agent? The answer is obvious—a mind did it. The laws of nature simply can’t account for a message of this sort.


I actually like Sean's version of Paley's argument. For "John Loves Mary" the answer is obvious. But throw in a few rounds of duplication, shuffling and a mutation or two so that you get "esohybJoL fJoL nseohyvan LoanseohesohyM rJr Myvam LoaM rJr M". Is that gripping romance or what? I think most people would answer - what. It's just a little demonstration of how easily our common sense intuitions (which are being appealed to here) can be confused. Then encode the message in piles of sand instead of strokes with a stick, and...

--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 02 2008,14:25   

Quote
Fuck You Sean McDowell You Ignorant Liar.


sigh...

Now, if I had said that about someone from your side, I'd have been banned to the bathroom wall.  There is nothing in that quote from McDowell that supports E's claim.

I'll have to order this book for my boys seeing as it has you folks so wound up.  It must be a good one.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
  158 replies since June 13 2008,16:16 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (6) < 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]