Theory of Intelligent Design

intelligent design of the universe or intelligent design of ones God

 

Uh, it is testable and makes predictions.

 

Of course it does. My faith includes intelligent design. In fact, you call it "the theory of intelligent design". Many are stating evolution as fact. Actually it is an unproven theory. Both require faith. You dismiss the "theory of intelligent design" in favor of your own. You call it science. I am stating it too is theory.

 

About what you previously said. Which would be hypothesizing that an intelligent cause is the best explanation for certain features of systems.

 

Again, I am referring to scientific merits here, not religious faith.

 

Alright, I see.

And you are correct.

But the opposite is also true.

If we are going to say that "we" had no beginning...holds for the concept of a god also...or that becomes special pleading.

Bottom Line: We do not know if gods exist or not. Best to leave it at: We do not know.

 

so is FSM, but those are taught in Sunday school as they require faith

 

I have said that asserting, "The blind guess that there are features of the universe best explained by intelligent design is absurd."

So that I am sure of what you are asking...are you asking me why I made that statement?

 

I will quote what you said:

My question is, how is it absurd?

 

The notion that there are features of the universe that are best explained by intelligent design...is an absurdity. It has no scientific or logical merits.

It is absurd primarily because it is an entirely gratuitous, self-serving, non-supportable comment.

Name a feature of anything that is "best explained by intelligent design."

Don't bother looking, because there is not a single one to be had.

Anything that can be explained by "intelligent design" can also be explained by "without intelligent design"...and I defy you to furnish reasonable statistical evidence that one is better than the other...and is better than any other possible explanation.

 

I will name one feature that is best explained by an intelligent cause, codified information.
Many systems may contain numerous possible explanations, more than one may be plausible under certain conditions, however, this doesn't mean that because there may be alternative explanations for something that contradicts another explanation that we therefore conclude absurdity to one of those explanations. That would be ignorant, especially in the scientific field.

 

First of all...let's get away from the use of words like "ignorant"...especially in the context in which you used it. There is nothing "ignorant" (or "stupid) from the context) about anything either of us is offering in this discussion.

In any case, I certainly do not understand what you are suggesting with "codified information"...nor why you are saying it is BEST explained by intelligent design over any other possible explanations.

Will you be more explicit?

 

It isn't a theory, not by a long shot! And no, it is crap.

A theory requires experimentation, duplication, peer review, and it must make predictions that can be tested.

Even String Theory doesn't qualify as a scientific theory because it can't be tested; at least not yet.

 

so is FSM, but those are taught in Sunday school as they require faith

which is more likely a God just popped into existence and created everything or energy that evolved into matter

 

By definition "God" is eternal; always was and always will be.

 

No possible way I could know...and the same hold for you and everyone else.

The people who blindly guess that at least one god exists...will guess that it is more likely a GOD popped into existence and then "created" what we humans call "the universe. The people who blindly guess that there are no gods...will guess that it is more likely that the reverse it true.

They both ought to get a grip!

 

Intelligent Design is not a theory. Evolution is a theory.

It is also a theory that if you drop something in a gravity field, if no other forces act on the object, it will always fall.

 

By definition???

By what definition...because I know of several "definitions" of gods that do not include that at all.

 

Sorry, the Christian God. You know, the real one!

Omniscient
Omnipresent
Omnipotent
Eternal

 

I agree, the basic idea is old. Nevertheless, the term "intelligent design" is pretty new.

It is an effort to make Creationism scientific enough for the classrooms or at the very least to "teach the controversy". While the motivation to develop "intelligent design" may be questionable, I still tried to talk about its merits (or lack thereof).

 

Intelligent design is a philosophical proposition, not a scientific one.

Unless it makes predictions that can be tested, it isn't science.

 

And Intelligent design has that, so I guess by your definition, intelligent design is science.
I will stress that it wouldn't be accurate to call it a theory (my title of this thread is a mistake), since that is a well-substantiated explanation and unifying explanation for a set of proven factors. Intelligent design is a hypothesis.

 

Name one in nature!

If you are saying that a complex system like Watson, for instance, is the product of intelligent design...we can prove that. No need for supposition.

Something from nature...though.

 

Has what? It makes no predictions that can be tested and it isn't science. This point is indisputable.

Unless it makes predictions that can be tested, it isn't science. That's all there is to it.

What tested predictions has it made? None.