N.Wells
Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-160714
| Quote | 15
Joseph
01/05/2008
9:43 am
2- Intelligent Design is NOT Creation. Anyone who conflates the two is as ignorant as a rock.
5- No IDist or Creationist argues that some biological features are so complex they could not have evolved through undirected processes.
10- Intelligent Design does not have any religious affiliation. |
Not that this really needs going over again, but since I'm into making a point of detailing about how full of crap the UD commentators are .......
With respect to #2, although there are some differences perhaps Joseph would like to explain:
a) The occurrence of “cdesign proponentsists” in an early draft of “Of Pandas and People”, as in “The basic metabolic pathways (reaction chains) of nearly all organisms are the same. Is this because of descent from a common ancestor, or because only these pathways (and their variations) can sustain life? Evolutionists think the former is correct, cdesign proponentsists accept the latter view.”
b) A 1986 draft with the title Biology and Creation said, “Creation means that the various forms of life began abruptly through the agency of an intelligent creator with their distinctive features already intact. Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, and wings, etc.” In not-so-stark contrast, a leter version said, “Intelligent design means that various forms of life began abruptly through an intelligent agency, with their distinctive features already intact. Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, wings, etc.”
c) How can life have had a Designer without also having a Creator?
With respect to #5, what does Joseph think that “irreducible complexity" means? Doesn’t he read UD, ARN, and the like, where that exact claim gets repeated with high regularity?
With regard to #10
| Quote |
(Devon Williams, CitizenLink): 4. Does your research conclude that God is the Intelligent Designer?
(William Dembski): I believe God created the world for a purpose. The Designer of intelligent design is, ultimately, the Christian God. |
Why did Phillip Johnson say, "the first thing that has to be done is to get the Bible out of the discussion" and "after we have separated materialist prejudice from scientific fact ... only then can 'biblical issues' be discussed."
Why did the Discovery Institute say in the “Wedge Document, “"Alongside a focus on influential opinion-makers, we also seek to build up a popular base of support among our natural constituency, namely, Christians. We will do this primarily through apologetics seminars. We intend these to encourage and equip believers with new scientific evidences that support the faith, as well as to 'popularize' our ideas in the broader culture."”?
Why did Jonathan Wells say, “Father's [Rev. Moon's] words, my studies, and my prayers convinced me that I should devote my life to destroying Darwinism, just as many of my fellow Unificationists had already devoted their lives to destroying Marxism. When Father chose me (along with about a dozen other seminary graduates) to enter a Ph.D. program in 1978, I welcomed the opportunity to prepare myself for battle.”
His other points aren't much better.
|
