Joe G
Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007
|
Kevin McCarthy- asshole:
| Quote | | Quote | | The theory of intelligent design (ID) holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection. ID is thus a scientific disagreement with the core claim of evolutionary theory that the apparent design of living systems is an illusion. http://www.uncommondescent.com/id-defi....defined |
(my underline, everything else is original) Wait, I thought ID wasn’t anti-evolution. Natural selection is a part of evolution. Most would say that it’s a major part of any evolutionary theory. Yet, Intelligent Design, as found on Uncommon Descent (a blog “Serving the Intelligent Design Community”), is defined as being the opposite of or opposing natural selection. |
Dumbass. The quote says ID opposes natural selection is a very specific sense, Kevin. Please learn how to read. Natural selection can exist without having designer mimic properties.
Not satisfied with that piece of stupidity Kevin presses on:
| Quote | | Quote | | Intelligent Design: An hypothesis that some natural phenomena are best explained by reference to Intelligent Causes rather than to only Material Causes. As such, Intelligent Design is the scientific disagreement with, and the falsifying hypothesis for, the claims of Chemical and Darwinian Evolution that the apparent design of certain natural phenomena is just an illusion. Intelligent design can also be viewed as the Science of design detection applied to natural phenomena.http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/Statement_of_Objectives_Feb_12_07.pdf |
(my underline, everything else original) This is the definition from the Intelligent Design Network, a group that “seeks institutional objectivity in origins science”. Well, that “disagreement with and a falsifying hypothesis for [evolution]” is pretty strong language. In fact, that is number 1 in our definition of ‘anti-‘. If ID is true, then ‘Chemical and Darwinian Evolution’ isn’t true. That’s what falsifying means. If X, then not Y. |
Right, DARWINIAN AND CHEMICAL EVOLUTION- meaning very specific claims wrt evolution. IOW Kevbo’s dishonesty is exposed- he switched out “Chemical and Darwinian evolution” with just “evolution”
Then he goes to Dr Behe who makes it clear that ID argues against Darwinian evolution and Kevin takes that to mean ID argues against evolution.
Being against Darwinian and neo-darwinian evolution does not mean being against evolution. Only ignorant and cowardly equivocators thinks so. And here is Kevin…
You are a fucking asshole, Kevin. That you are forced to take what we say out-of-context proves that you are nothing but a coward.
--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth
"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton
Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code- Â Acartia bogart, TARD
YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism
|
