Jump to content

Intelligent Design - Proof?


comix
 Share

Recommended Posts

:Hmm: I use gmail and at the top of one of my email was this - Intelligent Design Proven - 1Cosmos.org - The Results Are In: Information Theory, Math & Physics

has anyone seen this? I went to the site and they are offering an "email course" that proves that intelligent design is true. I was hesitant to give them my email address for obvious reasons. I was just wondering if anyone had heard of this and what it is about. :scratch:

Is it just another silly attempt to disprove evolution using false "facts" and warped information? That would be my guess - :Wendywhatever:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know anything about it but here are links from the site. The first thing I saw was 70 minutes too long. Maybe some one else could listen to it.

 

http://www.1cosmos.org/atheists_riddle.htm "So simple, any child can understand; So complex, no atheist can solve."

 

http://www.1cosmos.org/ifyoucanreadthis.htm

Part 2: A Christian and an Atheist Go the Zoo (Read Transcript)

 

“Did the Antelope evolve into the Giraffe?” According to Darwinian evolution, the necessities of the environment, random mutation and natural selection working together caused the antelope to grow a longer neck and become a giraffe. OK, then what does communication theory say about that hypothesis?

 

Natural Selection is perfectly valid and has been proven time and time again. But most people will be very surprised to discover that no one has ever actually demonstrated that random mutation can create new information. Information theory shows us why this is so: In communication systems, Random Mutation is exactly the same as noise, and noise always destroys the signal, never enhances it.

 

In communication systems this is called information entropy, and the formula for information entropy is exactly the same as thermodynamic entropy. Once lost, the information can never be recovered, much less enhanced. Thus we can be 100% certain that random mutation is not the source of biodiversity. A tool is provided, www.RandomMutation.com, that allows you to experiment and see for yourself that random mutation always destroys information, never enhances it.

 

This observation is also confirmed biologically by Theodosius Dobzhansky's fruit fly radiation experiments, Goldschmidt's gypsy moth experiments, and others. Decades of research were conducted in the early 20th century, bombarding fruit flies and moths with radiation in hope of mutating their DNA and producing improved creatures. These experiments were a total failure – there were no observed improvements – only weak, sickly, deformed fruit flies. Giraffes may have evolved from antelopes - I never said that couldn't happen, and I remain open to the possibility that it did. But it certainly wasn't because of Random Mutation!

 

We have proof that life on planet earth was designed by a mind - and that if life did evolve, the capacity to evolve had to be designed in. The word “Evolution” in the English language always refers to an intelligent process (in business, society, technology etc.) and the only usage in which it allegedly doesn't is naturalistic Darwinian evolution. But communication theory shows us that Evolution by Random Process is a hypothesis without proof.

 

Finally this presentation concludes with a brief observation: There is an interesting correspondence between Judeo-Christian theology and modern information theory, the statement words and language are the essence of creation: “And God said… In the beginning was the WORD;” that the worlds were spoken into existence.

 

 

http://www.1cosmos.org/audio/newevidence.htm (new evidence proving Intelligent design)

 

http://www.1cosmos.org/iidb.htm (marshall vs. 30 skeptics)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one here who is under the impression that biology and technology have little to do with one another?

 

Anywho, this guy is talking about forcing an artificial mutation caused by the dilliberate destruction of genes producing weaker animals. A natural mutation happens at birth and NOT in the lifetime of the animal. The gene was already there, and may in fact help the organism to survive.

 

This is what is called a straw man arguement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personal Comments After Debating Information Theory for Nearly 1 Year and Proving Intelligent Design to 30+ Atheists:

http://www.1cosmos.org/iidb.htm

Open Challenge. As of this writing (July 3, 2006) the discussion thread is still open on IIDB and discussion resumed in late February. I welcome anyone who understands information theory, and has a rigorous argument, to come forward and present it. No doubt people will editorialize about this elsewhere, attempting to dismiss it as 'arguing by failed analogy' or whatever. But to whoever says I'm wrong, I say: log on to the Infidels forum, step into the ring with me and prove I'm wrong. Note: Before you do this, do your homework. (I've done mine.) Carefully read every single post and make absolutely sure you're not just repeating what somebody else has already said.

 

 

Well here is his challenge on Infidels.org http://iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=135497&page=1

Any takers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i came across this gem earlier and saw your post. here is the conclusive proof of intelligent design.

 

"Proof of God - Intelligent Design

What would constitute objective proof of God? Well, consider the following self-evident and universally recognized truth: Concept and design necessitate an intelligent designer. The presence of intelligent design proves the existence of an intelligent designer. It's simply cause and effect."

 

save you the time, i feel sure they will break off in some long IC discussion, if there is a beginning there must be a creator, throw out some statistics of imposibility, provide a logical debate, and throw in a couple of other things to make you believe thier is conclusive scientific evidence of ID.

 

all in all, it is interesting stuff to read, but when it comes down to it, there is no concrete evidence of ID discovered to date. sorry to disappoint you. :HappyCry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:Hmm: I use gmail and at the top of one of my email was this - Intelligent Design Proven - 1Cosmos.org - The Results Are In: Information Theory, Math & Physics

has anyone seen this? I went to the site and they are offering an "email course" that proves that intelligent design is true. I was hesitant to give them my email address for obvious reasons. I was just wondering if anyone had heard of this and what it is about. :scratch:

Is it just another silly attempt to disprove evolution using false "facts" and warped information? That would be my guess - :Wendywhatever:

 

Comix:

 

The simple answer is that, in fact, it's another silly attempt. I am willing to bet that the information theory work is based upon Dembsky's work and the problem with that is that Dembsky doesn't know the first damn thing about information theory. The math is going to be a lot of hokum about probabilities which will *look* impressive unless one is well grounded in statistics, in which case you'll realize that there are crucial pieces of information that they are leaving out. The physics will almost certainly invoke the Second Law of Thermodynamics which creationists love to invoke to say that evolution violates it, but it doesn't because living things are not closed systems and neither is the Earth.

 

Quite honestly, I would simply save your money and avoid being a target for yet more spam.

 

Cheers

lf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One interesting question in the whole ID debate is, how does one know and how can one be able to recognize a supernatural design?

 

I'm imagining an ant stepping into a house. The house is designed, but would the ant recognize it as an designed ant hill? What about if the same ant step into a garden that someone is maintaining with care, would the ant recognize this garden as planned? Would the ant know and understand the difference between the garden and the forest where everything grows wild?

 

In the ID debate we're assuming that we as humans are so incredible smart and knoweldgable that we can (excuse us God for our pride here) know for sure how God works and how God designed something, and not only that but how it would look like when he did it.

 

Is brain cancer intelligently designed? Is immoral, evil, rape, murder, wars and tsunamis also intelligently designed? If not, then why is some things designed, but not others? And if it is designed, how can that be the explanation for the Jesus-Loves-You-All-God?

 

Lets say ID is right, that means that the Deists are right, and the Christians are wrong. Plainly because there are more things pointing to a chaotic system, and not a well planned construction.

 

I flipped a coin, and it came up "heads". I flipped it again, and it came up "heads" again. I did it 3 more times. All "heads" up. Is that design, or recognizable structure in a random pattern?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know, and please correct me if I'm wrong, it isn't the Deists demanding ID be valid in science. It is, by far, the Literalist Christians screaming ID.

 

We all know that it all started with the beginning of the Universe, but the Bible does not say that. It says it all started with the Earth. The Bible explains creation, case closed. Either they believe the Bible version or they don't. They are twisting both science AND the Bible to prove their god exists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know, and please correct me if I'm wrong, it isn't the Deists demanding ID be valid in science. It is, by far, the Literalist Christians screaming ID.

Yup. The fundamentalist Christians are the driving force behind ID, only because they feel a threat from science, that God is nowhere to be found, so they have to invent him somewhere in Science to keep their faith. Deists aren't so dependent on proof for their belief.

 

Only the person that try to find tangible proof for their gods, is the person that have doubts and are weak in their faith. They need to find support, because they're faltering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Proof of God - Intelligent Design

What would constitute objective proof of God? Well, consider the following self-evident and universally recognized truth: Concept and design necessitate an intelligent designer. The presence of intelligent design proves the existence of an intelligent designer. It's simply cause and effect."

This is proof that ID hasn't gotten anywhere since Paley.

I wonder if IDiots think ants and termites are intelligent...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One interesting question in the whole ID debate is, how does one know and how can one be able to recognize a supernatural design?

 

I'm imagining an ant stepping into a house. The house is designed, but would the ant recognize it as an designed ant hill? What about if the same ant step into a garden that someone is maintaining with care, would the ant recognize this garden as planned? Would the ant know and understand the difference between the garden and the forest where everything grows wild?

 

In the ID debate we're assuming that we as humans are so incredible smart and knoweldgable that we can (excuse us God for our pride here) know for sure how God works and how God designed something, and not only that but how it would look like when he did it.

 

Is brain cancer intelligently designed? Is immoral, evil, rape, murder, wars and tsunamis also intelligently designed? If not, then why is some things designed, but not others? And if it is designed, how can that be the explanation for the Jesus-Loves-You-All-God?

 

Lets say ID is right, that means that the Deists are right, and the Christians are wrong. Plainly because there are more things pointing to a chaotic system, and not a well planned construction.

 

I flipped a coin, and it came up "heads". I flipped it again, and it came up "heads" again. I did it 3 more times. All "heads" up. Is that design, or recognizable structure in a random pattern?

 

this is a debate that i have yet to come up with a good answer, but i will say. in looking at the scope of things, what you pointed out that is not inteligent design (brain Ca., ect.) occurrs at a very small incidence, so it is not a perfectly designed system, but a well functioning one. in reading, a literalist will claim that all problems with humanity are a result of sin. that was what i was thinking last year when katrina blew off the roof of my house. "damn i must have pissed off God."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

this is a debate that i have yet to come up with a good answer, but i will say. in looking at the scope of things, what you pointed out that is not inteligent design (brain Ca., ect.) occurrs at a very small incidence, so it is not a perfectly designed system, but a well functioning one. in reading, a literalist will claim that all problems with humanity are a result of sin. that was what i was thinking last year when katrina blew off the roof of my house. "damn i must have pissed off God."

 

Freeday,

 

I think you are understanding what our gripe against Christianity is. It warped our view of the world, other people, ourselves, and our relationships. Coming out from under the rock of fundamentalism is enlighting and also humbling.

 

Taph

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.