I.D. Seemed To Contradict Xianity

[NimbusBirdMgp]

Intillegent Design still seems to haunt me with this life. I still think there is something that got it started, but then it just follows the domino effects of DNA's construction following the offsprings of life. As is the diversity is allowed, so as to see something different in small details. That it also follows through as evolution. I'm prone to think we could be spiritual with the idea of being created. But I'm guessing this life is better at being a Pantheist Universe, than man made religions.

 

Because of the senses we have to thrive for living in this world. When Christianity is so hung up on Intillegent Design. The religion contradicts it also.

 

Here is where I find the contradictions ...

 

Man was given the erotic perceptions of a woman. But now the Bible is calling this Intillegent Design a Sin. So why then is this Intillegent Design at the begin with?

 

And to live as we where made ... Christianity is saying we are Intillegently Designed as Sinners. If we live in the flesh, we are sinners.

So how in the world would this be a great idea that we where Intillegently Designed and now it was wrong, when the Bible said it was good? And then goes on to say it is not good, wrong and our sins?

 

I had trouble with that when I was into Christianity 1969 - 1981. The religion is only suggestive, while most people don't rationalize things. I can't understand why people don't rationalize, life's perspective.

 

I think as looking to this world introspectively and rationally. Intillegent Design would be the idea of grasping a sense of Awe and Inspiration with this life with our passions. And trying to sustain our health and well being. The only thing I though of Sin in life, was that we don't do this with life. But make up religions and contradict life. That to me is the real Sin.

[pandora]

I think you have said something really profound there in your last paragraph.

 

We "make up religions and contradict life, this is the real Sin."

 

I agree with you.

[Asimov]

I still think there is something that got it started...

 

Well you're wrong.

[Clergicide]

I still think there is something that got it started

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Something, but not a sentient entity. ID is trumped by adaptation. Basically evolution is rapidly becoming an irrefutable science, so Christianity is falling back on "Well God may not have created each creature, but surely he created the primordial ooze.". But the complexity of an organism is not proof of God. Design would indicate that natural habitats were created for the creatures that would inevitably inhabit them, the problem is adaptation proves something totally different, that creatures had to evolve to survive in the environments they are in. Design is akin to saying that our skin offers no protection to most climates so that we could invent clothing.

 

"It is demonstrable," said he, "that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end. Observe, for instance, the nose is formed for spectacles, therefore we wear spectacles. The legs are visibly designed for stockings, accordingly we wear stockings. Stones were made to be hewn and to construct castles, therefore My Lord has a magnificent castle; for the greatest baron in the province ought to be the best lodged. Swine were intended to be eaten, therefore we eat pork all the year round: and they, who assert that everything is right, do not express themselves correctly; they should say that everything is best." Candide -Voltaire 1759

 

It doesn't make any fuckin sense. Design is not a new concept, and it's certainly not an intelligent one.

[Guest aexapo]

Something, but not a sentient entity.  ID is trumped by adaptation.  Basically evolution is rapidly becoming an irrefutable science, so Christianity is falling back on "Well God may not have created each creature, but surely he created the primordial ooze.".  But the complexity of an organism is not proof of God.  Design would indicate that natural habitats were created for the creatures that would inevitably inhabit them, the problem is adaptation proves something totally different, that creatures had to evolve to survive in the environments they are in.  Design is akin to saying that our skin offers no protection to most climates so that we could invent clothing. 

It doesn't make any fuckin sense.  Design is not a new concept, and it's certainly not an intelligent one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I heard something somewhere where the "praise Jesus" people don't believe ID, either. It's simply a "lie" (to us and to them) concocted to get a foothold legally to prevent the teaching of evolution. They really don't believe God created "ooze" or took 6 billion years -- they believe he looked around, and spent six days throwing his arms about and seeing that it was good.

 

There are those, though, that do believe in something similar to intelligent design -- and those people are generally moderate to liberal Catholics, Episcopalians, Lutherans, etc -- people that support the premise of evolution (with a twist), but aren't politically motivated to challenge the educational system. The people running around screaming the phrase, though, are "born-again" evangelical, fundamentalist, or pentecostal, right-wing nuts.

 

It's usually done on their off-day, you know, when they aren't bombing abortion clinics or crashing the funerals of AIDS victims.

 

[Clergicide]

It's usually done on their off-day, you know, when they aren't bombing abortion clinics or crashing the funerals of AIDS victims.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Too funny!!

 

It's simply a "lie" (to us and to them) concocted to get a foothold legally to prevent the teaching of evolution.

 

I don't see how this position is even tenable. With all the latest techniques, there are a dozen or so processes that converge evidence on one simple fact: evolution. ID would never be slated for a Christian school, but I can see it being inserted in public schools in Christian regions. ID is far more supportive of, and really opens the door to, Christianity, where evolution is a direct affront on it. No public school parents can complain about religion being forced on their kids, because it's not religion, but it is Christian psuedo-science meant to pave the way for converstion. In America, once you accept there is intelligent design..where are you most likely to turn for further spiritual exploration of that? I don't think it would Hinduism.

[NimbusBirdMgp]

I can't see how DNA can construct anything living to act on adapations. If it has to adapat to something, how would DNA know the right path to take in doing that? It would seem that it can form very little, without something else being involved with DNA adapting, to formulate the senses and cognition of life. As we say nothing other than elements of this universe exist. I have a problem as to why just these elements of a universe exist. For what reason?

 

It is said, that Atheist can't be certain about other things that can be going on in this Universe. A Deity can still be accepted. It is that Christianity and other Religions that I see contradicts Intelligent Design.

 

I still agree with Science in what they see of life coming from evolution. I still think something got it started and going from the past.

 

I have accepted being wrong. And could on this. Just that at this point my head hurts about these extreme issues from Christianity and Radical Atheist that think it's 100% certaintly, there isn't anything involved with this universe.

[Asimov]

I can't see how DNA can construct anything living to act on adapations.  If it has to adapat to something, how would DNA know the right path to take in doing that?  It would seem that it can form very little, without something else being involved with DNA adapting, to formulate the senses and cognition of life.

 

Well, it's called the laws of physics, it's called chemistry, and it's called time.

 

As we say nothing other than elements of this universe exist.  I have a problem as to why just these elements of a universe exist.  For what reason?

 

Reasons are subjective, it just happened.

[Ouroboros]

I can't see how DNA can construct anything living to act on adapations.

DNA doesn't construct it. Mutations causes the DNA to change. There's plenty of different kinds of mutagens (chemicals, radiation...) that cause mutations to happen. Cancer is a mutation of your own cells. DNA doesn't choose this, it becomes it from being disturbed by chemicals, enzymes, radiation, etc.

 

If it has to adapat to something, how would DNA know the right path to take in doing that?

It doesn't. Think of a trillion of mutated genes. And then some of them are better fit to survive than others.

 

Let me give you an illustration: (extremely simplified)

 

Get 10 dice.

Lets say you are nature, and you decided what conditions the dice will survive.

Roll them.

Before you look, let's now make up the survival condition: only 5's and 6's survive. 1's, 2's, 3's, 4's will die.

In my case I got

1 1 2 3 3 4 5 5 6 6

So four dice survived, two 5's and two 6's

 

Now take the 6 other dice (they died) and the become dirt and become nutrition for the two 5's and two 6's, and the 5's and 6's procreate.

 

Roll the 6 oher dice, my result: 1 1 1 2 2 2 5 5

 

So now two 5's more survived, and the rest died out.

 

We have now four 5's and two 6's.

 

Roll the six dice you have left, and keep on doing this a couple of times.

 

Eventually you will end up with only 5's and 6's.

 

Huh! Isn't it fantastic, how did the dice know that I only would let 5's and 6's survive?

 

This is mutation and selection in the works. Of course genetic mutation and natural selection is far more complex than this, but the basic idea is the same. Massive multiplication of massive mutations and then reduction by high/low chance of survival.

 

Our life looks the way it does, because that is what manage to survive the best. We are the outcome of the better fitted from the past. But we can't know for the future though, we might as humans not be the best creature to survive the future.

 

It would seem that it can form very little, without something else being involved with DNA adapting, to formulate the senses and cognition of life.  As we say nothing other than elements of this universe exist.  I have a problem as to why just these elements of a universe exist.  For what reason?

It's the reversed. Without you becoming a creature with a mind to think this things, you would never ask the question for reason. You ask the question because you are here. There are no reason. The reason is to ask the question and never get the answer.

 

It is said, that Atheist can't be certain about other things that can be going on in this Universe.  A Deity can still be accepted.  It is that Christianity and other Religions that I see contradicts Intelligent Design.

I'm not sure I understand you here.

 

I still agree with Science in what they see of life coming from evolution.  I still think something got it started and going from the past.

The universe got it started.

 

I have accepted being wrong.  And could on this.  Just that at this point my head hurts about these extreme issues from Christianity and Radical Atheist that think it's 100% certaintly, there isn't anything involved with this universe.

You have to let go. You have to accept what is, and what is not. It's all about letting go of the thoughts we don't understand. It is the same effect as when you get religious and claim God-did-it, just so you can let go of the question. That's why religion gives peace, because it makes you stop questioning. You can stop the questioning without a religion, and just accept that we don't know, and there is just as much chance that God does not exist, but your only purpose is to make the best life you can make while you're here!

[BLACKGRAVITY]

damn i love this place.

[vargo]

Hundreds of years ago, it was not enough for scientists (who

were overwhelmingly Christian at the time) to look at the rain and say

"God makes the rains fall". They wanted to know HOW he did it, and

determined that God would not make every raindrop himself; no, he would

make a MECHANISM so that the rain could precipitate and fall by itself.

Similarly, scientists did not look at earthquakes and say "God makes

the

Earth shake"; that was simply not enough for them. So they determined

that he had better things to do than knock the Earth around like a kid

stomping his feet, and he must have created a MECHANISM to make the

Earth shake by itself.

 

So why should a scientist be satisfied by saying "God made the

species",

without asking the obvious next question of HOW he did it? Does God

truly have nothing better to do than sit around and design fifty

thousand different species of beetle, one at a time? Did he really

individually design all of the different dinosaur species that would

eventually go extinct? Is his hit/miss design ratio really that bad? Or

would God be smart enough to create a simple, elegant MECHANISM through

which species can develop (or dare I say, "evolve") by themselves? It

is

the job of scientists to discover the mechanisms that make the universe

work, not to simply say "God did it" and not bother asking how.

 

In other words, the fact that you believe in God does not mean that you

have to believe in a God who does repetitive menial labour.

[Ouroboros]

So why should a scientist be satisfied by saying "God made the

species",

without asking the obvious next question of HOW he did it? Does God

truly have nothing better to do than sit around and design fifty

thousand different species of beetle, one at a time? Did he really

individually design all of the different dinosaur species that would

eventually go extinct? Is his hit/miss design ratio really that bad? Or

would God be smart enough to create a simple, elegant MECHANISM through

which species can develop (or dare I say, "evolve") by themselves? It

is

the job of scientists to discover the mechanisms that make the universe

work, not to simply say "God did it" and not bother asking how.

 

In other words, the fact that you believe in God does not mean that you

have to believe in a God who does repetitive menial labour.

Exactly. I agree. Evolution has never removed faith or belief in a god, only explained how a potential god could have created the species, which method he would have used. To argue against evolution only hurts religion, because in the end evolution will run out of questions, and religion will run out of apologetic answers.

 

It's interesting if you start thinking about how the genetic structure works, and how the copy mechanism works in the DNA. God is not involved and put his fingers into the cell and pick out the pieces and copy them and put them together again, it's happening by itself like a machine! Or look at the conception, it's not new matter that is created from vacuum, the cell is created from the sperm and the egg, and it's totally AUTOMATIC! It works by itself, without help, without magic tricks and without some halo shine surrounding the womb. It's completely natural and has been explained in scientific terms. If Creationism was right, every fetus should be a supernatural event, with the cell popping up from nowhere. But it doesn't.

[Brutal Brian]

Intelligent Design a.k.a. Yet another tactic in the seemingly endless attempts to prove the existence of something as pointless and horrible as the BuyBull.

 

People will never agree on this, just like they can't agree on what to have to eat, or who should get to eat.

[Ouroboros]

Intelligent Design is just a new attempt to use neoplatonic arguments for perfection and ideals as the proof of a god, while these are pretty and interesting philosophical discussions, they don't lend much to explain reality. It's like Philo, Plotinus and St. Augustine have been reincarnated with their mysticism. But science is based on skepticism, and ID would only kill science instead of helping it.

[NimbusBirdMgp]

DNA doesn't construct it. Mutations causes the DNA to change. There's plenty of different kinds of mutagens (chemicals, radiation...) that cause mutations to happen. Cancer is a mutation of your own cells. DNA doesn't choose this, it becomes it from being disturbed by chemicals, enzymes, radiation, etc.

It doesn't. Think of a trillion of mutated genes. And then some of them are better fit to survive than others.

 

Let me give you an illustration: (extremely simplified)

 

Get 10 dice.

Lets say you are nature, and you decided what conditions the dice will survive.

Roll them.

Before you look, let's now make up the survival condition: only 5's and 6's survive. 1's, 2's, 3's, 4's will die.

In my case I got

1 1 2 3 3 4 5 5 6 6

So four dice survived, two 5's and two 6's

 

Now take the 6 other dice (they died) and the become dirt and become nutrition for the two 5's and two 6's, and the 5's and 6's procreate.

 

Roll the 6 oher dice, my result: 1 1 1 2 2 2 5 5

 

So now two 5's more survived, and the rest died out.

 

We have now four 5's and two 6's.

 

Roll the six dice you have left, and keep on doing this a couple of times.

 

Eventually you will end up with only 5's and 6's.

 

Huh! Isn't it fantastic, how did the dice know that I only would let 5's and 6's survive?

 

This is mutation and selection in the works. Of course genetic mutation and natural selection is far more complex than this, but the basic idea is the same. Massive multiplication of massive mutations and then reduction by high/low chance of survival.

 

Our life looks the way it does, because that is what manage to survive the best. We are the outcome of the better fitted from the past. But we can't know for the future though, we might as humans not be the best creature to survive the future.

It's the reversed. Without you becoming a creature with a mind to think this things, you would never ask the question for reason. You ask the question because you are here. There are no reason. The reason is to ask the question and never get the answer.

I'm not sure I understand you here.

The universe got it started.

You have to let go. You have to accept what is, and what is not. It's all about letting go of the thoughts we don't understand. It is the same effect as when you get religious and claim God-did-it, just so you can let go of the question. That's why religion gives peace, because it makes you stop questioning. You can stop the questioning without a religion, and just accept that we don't know, and there is just as much chance that God does not exist, but your only purpose is to make the best life you can make while you're here!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm not against what you said. I still see somethings unexplained. Insects and Dinosaurs having wings to fly some 80 million years ago. We don't have wings. I think since we envied winged creatures, why is it that we don't have wings? That envy is the myths of poeple thinking they have seen Angels in the past. That envy shows why the Native American's wore feathered garmets. Yet, with all that effert to alter our DNA, it doesn't work. Something else is doing it, that is not explained yet. I like to see Science find the answers, but I do see we need to have that open mindedness as be as a freethinker for what it means.

[Ouroboros]

I'm not against what you said.  I still see somethings unexplained.  Insects and Dinosaurs having wings to fly some 80 million years ago.  We don't have wings.  I think since we envied winged creatures, why is it that we don't have wings?  That envy is the myths of poeple thinking they have seen Angels in the past.  That envy shows why the Native American's wore feathered garmets.  Yet, with all that effert to alter our DNA, it doesn't work.  Something else is doing it, that is not explained yet.  I like to see Science find the answers, but I do see we need to have that open mindedness as be as a freethinker for what it means.

But science and evolution DO explain that.

 

Mutations are random changes of the DNA, and some animals evolved into flying animals, while others didn't. It's like a tree branching out in different directions.

 

Evolution does not mean that we all evolved in a single line, that we share the same line of ancestors all the way back with horses, house flies, parrots, turtles, frogs etc. The different species separated at early stages, and the birds and humans are not close relatives at all. Birds are not mammals even. We are closer in the evolutionary treee to the bats than we are to the birds.

 

Go back to the dice experiment. Let's say mammals are number 6, and the birds are number 5. Both survive, but they're different.

[NimbusBirdMgp]

But science and evolution DO explain that.

 

Mutations are random changes of the DNA, and some animals evolved into flying animals, while others didn't. It's like a tree branching out in different directions.

 

Evolution does not mean that we all evolved in a single line, that we share the same line of ancestors all the way back with horses, house flies, parrots, turtles, frogs etc. The different species separated at early stages, and the birds and humans are not close relatives at all. Birds are not mammals even. We are closer in the evolutionary treee to the bats than we are to the birds.

 

Go back to the dice experiment. Let's say mammals are number 6, and the birds are number 5. Both survive, but they're different.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

OK. Now my thoughts go this way ... Looking at the branch that reptiles started from some 100 million years ago and for insects also. How would the DNA know how to make wings for these creatures, so that they can take to the air?

 

(I'm not expecting us to know this yet. But it's a mysterous situation in which I still have that question.)

[Amethyst]

I think since we envied winged creatures, why is it that we don't have wings?

 

We didn't evolve from insects or birds or winged reptiles, we evolved from monkeys. You're essentially comparing apples to coffee cups, which are really quite different.

[Ouroboros]

OK.  Now my thoughts go this way ...  Looking at the branch that reptiles started from some 100 million years ago and for insects also.  How would the DNA know how to make wings for these creatures, so that they can take to the air?

 

(I'm not expecting us to know this yet.  But it's a mysterous situation in which I still have that question.)

No, you misunderstand evolution.

 

Evolution doesn't know that it has to make wings to make an animal fly!

 

Say that one animal can't fly, and they get some babies that are disformed because of a mutated gene. This mutation is totally random and accidental. No plan, no intelligence, no design, it just happened.

 

One of the babies have some extra skin between his arms and his body, and discovers when he grows up that he can jump from a tree and sail in the wind to the next tree.

 

This little creature have a little advantage over the other siblings, and can avoid some of the existing predators, and can manage to survive easier.

 

Now, this genetic mutation was from birth, and the babies this little creature gets inherits his deformation, and inherits the same little advantage against their cousines.

 

With time and more lucky and random genetic mutations suddenly new traits starts to show up.

 

This has nothing to do with planning or knowing. It's random new traits and deformations, and some deformations are not for the best for survival, while other deformations and traits are better for survival.

[Ouroboros]

Let's make a hypothetical pondering:

 

There's a super lotto in California.

 

Last year, one person, Jane Doe, won the super lotto of 100 million dollars. She was poor and needed the money.

 

How did the balls know to give the exact numbers she had, so she could win?

 

Answer: They didn't know. It was the random mix of players and random selection of balls.

 

But afterwards, look at her situation, she really needed the money.

 

So did she win by design, because her need of money, or did she win by pure chance?

[NimbusBirdMgp]

This just gets me anxious to see Scientist exploring Mars. Somehow, as most people. Mars could yeald a lot of evidence to how life got started through the fossles that could be found there.

 

And then some of Jupiter's Moons has other options for that primordial icy waters and land.

[Amethyst]

This just gets me anxious to see Scientist exploring Mars. Somehow, as most people. Mars could yeald a lot of evidence to how life got started through the fossles that could be found there.

 

I agree with you there. I would like them to find something, but with the hurricane relief bill, I think NASA isn't going to get much funding for a while. In the future, most space exploration will have to be privately funded.

[NimbusBirdMgp]

I agree with you there.  I would like them to find something, but with the hurricane relief bill, I think NASA isn't going to get much funding for a while.  In the future, most space exploration will have to be privately funded.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm bothered though that the Hurricane has caused a lot of people to increase their spending on Sport activities in the mean time.

 

Cause I work at this Golf Course and last week had doubled it's business and most things on TV is more Foot Ball. And News seems to be covering more Sports activities. I don't like Sports.

[Ouroboros]

  I'm bothered though that the Hurricane has caused a lot of people to increase their spending on Sport activities in the mean time.

 

Cause I work at this Golf Course and last week had doubled it's business and most things on TV is more Foot Ball.  And News seems to be  covering more Sports activities.  I don't like Sports. 

Maybe media is trying to shift peoples focus away from the bad events, and calm us down?

[Amethyst]

Maybe media is trying to shift peoples focus away from the bad events, and calm us down?

 

True. And it's the start of football season.