Intelligent Design HAS to be wrong...

Some of you would prefer unintelligent design? Imagine us then. Anything to get far away from God, Deity, or anything Bill Nye don't like.

a reply to: Lazarus Short

Some of us prefer objective evidence over feel-good myths.

originally posted by: Lazarus Short
Some of you would prefer unintelligent design? Imagine us then. Anything to get far away from God, Deity, or anything Bill Nye don't like.

haha. no, we prefer intelligent, honest investigation.

whatever comes of that...

Well if you understand intelligent design then you must realize that it excludes humans. Humans are created in the image of God. Therefore Gods image must therefore be perfect and in turn our bodies a refection of His perfection. You see this shape we have, this body, is a reflection of the shape of our spirit which is eternal. Any malformation of the original can be used but not as intended. there will be major issues with the new structural improvements. Anywho, that's what I got.

a reply to: Lazarus Short

the failings with all claims of inteligent design < sic > is that :

there are multiple " solutions " both designed and evolutionary to the same " problem "

BUT

superiour solutions are dotted at random around the biosphere - not universally applied

the clincher comes when you look at eveolutionary devepopment - and see that the solution to each poroblem that an organism has isnt determited by weather its the " best " for that organism - but where that organism fall in the evolutionary path - and where the alternate solutions lie

thats why evolution is accepted as the best explaination of the development of living organisms - while ID remains utter twaddle[ re badged creationist twaddle at that ] .

glaring examples include :

eyeballs

vitamin c dependance / self synthesis

originally posted by: anotherdaytoday
Eh? But then I'd rather have some wings to fly, instead of a second pair of hands.

Now we're talking

Four hands would just mean I could work harder, I work hard enough already.

I wanna fly!

originally posted by: Anaana

originally posted by: anotherdaytoday
Eh? But then I'd rather have some wings to fly, instead of a second pair of hands.

Now we're talking

Four hands would just mean I could work harder, I work hard enough already.

I wanna fly!

why not four arms AND a pair of wings!

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Anaana

originally posted by: anotherdaytoday
Eh? But then I'd rather have some wings to fly, instead of a second pair of hands.

Now we're talking

Four hands would just mean I could work harder, I work hard enough already.

I wanna fly!

why not four arms AND a pair of wings!

Six limbs and wings! Am I an insect?

GetHyped, TzarChasm, and Ignornant_Ape:

You know, I'm fairly well-read on these subjects too, and you must know that a brief mention of this-or-that is not going to change my mind. You're wasting your keystrokes, but then, I suppose I am too...

As I've stated on ATS before, we're discussing largely non-repeatable events, mostly outside the purview of experimental science. Without a time machine to go back and observe directly, the evolution/intelligent design/creationist issue will never be resolved. That's my bottom line.

We should have arms like gibbons, all four of them, and be able to dunk the ball like Jordan everytime.

I don't know, I'm leaning towards the arms and opposable thumb thing being the bum deal...what have our thumbs ever done for us other than make life more complicated?

I think four legs, no arms is better.

And wings...I still wanna fly.

originally posted by: rossacus
I've seen it all now. Isn't 6 arms better than 4, if we had 4 it would prove that intelligent design didn't exist because 6 is better than 4.

OMG...I've just realised....8 is better than 6....there goes my theory

Yep. 4 isn't necessarily better than 2. Imagine sleeping with 4 arms, it would guarantee one of goes numb from sleeping on it every night. Plus, more body mass means more energy required to live. It's not just about convenience.



How exactly do you put a shoulder joint where your lungs and heart should be?


There are far better reasons why ID is false, and this isn't one of them.

a reply to: Barcs
Can ppl not see I am just mocking the OP thread. I'm fully aware of energy requirements for extra limbs.

How can people assume this was a serious post...jeez

one question about intelligent design?....how does the mosquito fit in...it has no value to other species, it's a parasite that only exits by extracting blood from other animals. it spreads diseases that kill far beyond the diseases normal contact area. if ingested as food by birds, small animals, etc. it has the potential of killing that very animal that uses it as a food source....even diseases have boundaries that they cannot cross without dying, WITH THE EXCEPTION of being carried off by the mosquito to infect another host....the mosquitos only use is to kill other life forms.

a reply to: rossacus

Unfortunately in this forum Poe's Law has a constant presence:

"Poe's Law" was originally written by Nathan Poe in 2005, in a post on christianforums.com, an internet forum about Christianity. The post was written in the context of a debate about creationism, where a previous poster had remarked "Good thing you included the winky. Otherwise people might think you are serious". Poe then replied, "Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is uttrerly [sic] impossible to parody a Creationist in such a way that someone won't mistake for the genuine article.".[1] The original statement of Poe's Law referred specifically to creationism, but it has since been generalized to apply to any kind of fundamentalism or extremism.[3]

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: rossacus

Indeed. I thought it was obvious. I was essentially agreeing with you. Plus Goro's awesome.

a reply to: jimmyx
If we are talking about intelligent design wouldn't a "creator" want to keep a sustainable population. The mosquito is a form of that. Not the greatest justification for a lack of I'D. I Don't believe in ID but there are better examples out there

a reply to: Barcs

Lol. That he is. Always been a sheeva man myself, she was designed by a more intelligent creator...lmao

a reply to: taoistguy

Ok. modify it. Fairly intelligent design.....

Dumbest thread started. Maybe because humans are getting stupider we need to have more gadgets and junk in our hands. This doesn't prove flaw in 'design.' Humans don't need to multitask in one moment to survive. You need you hand to put food in your mouth. Having an extra is a luxury. Having two feet is more than sufficient. The objective is to move from point A to B. This is being accomplished well enough. Major hole in your comment.