In support of Intelligent Design

I'll start by saying I don't believe in any deities and that I have no doubts that evolution is a theory as grounded in evidence as the theory of gravity. There may be small clarifications to come regarding some aspects of the theory but nothing dramatic. After all, Darwin knew less about evolution back in the day than the Apologists who deny it today.

However, there are some things which make me question my nihilistic views. I guess it's human nature to want to feel special and I think that's where the bulk of the creationist ideas come from however being wrong is also human nature so that doesn't mean much.

I don't want a debate, but I would love to hear what questions other people have also. With any luck we can either clear up some misconceptions or find new one's and leave this thread a little dumber.

Anyway, here goes.

1. The fused chromosome, I first learnt about this from Lloyd Pye so it is probably twisted to sell more books however it could also be evidence of biological interference. As far as I'm aware we are the only ape with 1 less pair of chromosomes. Does anyone know when this happened? Or is it even possible to check? For example would Lucy have the fused pair also, or Neanderthals, or Denisovans?

Probably an ignorant question but it does make me think.

2. Sun to Moon ratio, "Who Built the Moon" went into detail about the coincidence of the Moon and Sun appearing the same size. The book ended with the author stating that future humans went back in time and put the moon there. So we can basically dismiss the majority of the book however the mathematical coincidences still makes me feel a little uneasy.

There doesn't seem to be a physics reason for this that I'm aware of. Also with the moon slowly getting further away, we are in the "goldilocks" timezone of having eclipses that the dinosaurs weren't able to witness way back when. And in the future our robot overlords will also miss out.

Also the "double whack" theory of how the moon formed naturally is a little suspect. (Awaiting better science I'm sure, I don't think they are trying to mislead)

3. 10,500 BC, for some reason this date comes up a lot. The Sphynx is thought to have been done then according to water erosion. Pyramids all over the world seem to point to the date as well. The Giza pyramids reference the constellation Orion as it was in 10,500BC.

This could very well just be misdirection from the ancient astronaut crowd although I haven't seen it debunked yet.

4. The Big Bang, "A Universe From Nothing" explains plausibly that everything could come from nothing (no matter, I should say). But if time was created in the big bang how could the quantum foam or whatever you want to call it move and do what it needed to do to create the big bang.

Is spacetime just a reference point for matter and quantum particles runs on a different clock?
-----------------------------------------------------

Well that's a start, I should just say again that I'm not trying to prove anything here apart from my ignorance.
These are just some things I don't understand and whilst I'd love to be called an idiot and shown the answers, I would also love to see some other idiots who have similar questions.

Oh no,your gona get whipped,good points,way above my head,but i m sure you will get a smack down. My opinion is....,wait for it...........nobody knows,we are fed ,and most of us keep eating it

a reply to: hiddenNZ

Hahahaha cheers for the support. Or at least an audience for the smackdown to come.

a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar

If the universe is infinite intelligent design is inevitable.

a reply to: Vector99
True, I like to think that some day in the future robots will be fighting over whether humans existed.
(I think that would be the first created consciousness however).

Although in an infinite universe natural creation is also inevitable.

But when it comes to infinity there are only 2 types of people. People who claim to understand it, and honest people.

If you look at design, you never ask yourself if there is intelligence behind it. That is a redundant statement: Intelligent design.

Although I do realize that some things that are designed are done so by lesser intelligence than others, but every design comes from an intellect.

If you see something has been designed there is no need to wonder if there was a designer. That is already a given.

4. The Big Bang, "A Universe From Nothing" explains plausibly that everything could come from nothing (no matter, I should say). But if time was created in the big bang how could the quantum foam or whatever you want to call it move and do what it needed to do to create the big bang.

A super mega massive singularity sitting in complete emptiness for untold eons one moment decides to "explode"
"In the beginning there was darkness , and darkness filled the void. God said , let there be light and there was light"

a reply to: Gothmog

"There was darkness , and darkness filled the void. God said , let there be light and there was light"

Except that before he say that there was "the surface of the deep" and stuff. So...no.

originally posted by: Gothmog

4. The Big Bang, "A Universe From Nothing" explains plausibly that everything could come from nothing (no matter, I should say). But if time was created in the big bang how could the quantum foam or whatever you want to call it move and do what it needed to do to create the big bang.

A super mega massive singularity sitting in complete emptiness for untold eons one moment decides to "explode"
"In the beginning there was darkness , and darkness filled the void. God said , let there be light and there was light"

Good point. If you believe in the singularity, why can't you believe in the person who created it?

Why can you believe one and not the other? Design shows their was a designer.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Gothmog

"There was darkness , and darkness filled the void. God said , let there be light and there was light"

Except that before he say that there was "the surface of the deep" and stuff. So...no.

I tried to just go on by that one , but I failed .
Say what ?

a reply to: GailNot

Why can you believe one and not the other? Design shows their was a designer.

A designer designed by whom?
Want to go all infinite regressiony?

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Gothmog

"There was darkness , and darkness filled the void. God said , let there be light and there was light"

Except that before he say that there was "the surface of the deep" and stuff. So...no.

I tried to just go on by that one , but I failed .
Say what ?

Before God said, "be light", there was, according to the story, matter. That does not really coincide with the theory of the "big bang" or inflation. So don't conflate them.

originally posted by: [post=21091087]Krahzeef_Ukhar
I
.......Well that's a start, I should just say again that I'm not trying to prove anything here apart from my ignorance.
These are just some things I don't understand and whilst I'd love to be called an idiot and shown the answers, I would also love to see some other idiots who have similar questions.

Idiot? - They may try to make you feel that way here so let me give you a quote from one of the giants of theoretical physics in the 20th Century that you can fight back with - And then ask them to try to prove that science shows nither intelligence or design:

"All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force... We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter."
- Max Planck

And who was Max Planck?

"Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck, FRS[2] (/plɑːŋk/;[3] 23 April 1858 – 4 October 1947) was a German theoretical physicist whose work on quantum theory won him the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1918.[4] Planck made many contributions to theoretical physics, but his fame as a physicist rests primarily on his role as an originator of quantum theory, which revolutionized human understanding of atomic and subatomic processes. However, his name is also known on a broader academic basis, through the renaming in 1948 of the German scientific institution, the Kaiser Wilhelm Society (of which he was twice president), as the Max Planck Society (MPS). The MPS now includes 83 institutions representing a wide range of scientific directions."
See whole article here:
en.wikipedia.org...

One more from Planck:

“I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.”
– Max Planck


But you see Krahzeef_Ukhar these people that will call you an idiot and try to educate you in the unconscious materialist
universe are themselves lacking consciousness - How can unconscious materialists really observe a conseious and intelligent
universe - But if it sounds like it even might be spiritual or religious they will attack it. After all Atheism is the new religion
of today - And Intelligent Design contradicts the magical univere of the Atheist - After all isn't it more magical for a universe to spring from nothing instead of a creator [or creative force]

a reply to: AlienView

"All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force... We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter."

Why must we assume that? In science assumptions are frowned upon and often found to be mistaken.

It was long assumed that the Earth does not move. That assumption was wrong. Some still assume that someone made the Earth.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: GailNot

Why can you believe one and not the other? Design shows their was a designer.

A designer designed by whom?
Want to go all infinite regressiony?

Well, someone or something has always had to exist. Or we would not be here. It's not really that complicated. God obviously had no beginning.

Before you say, no that is not possible, remember that you imagine it is possible for something to have always existed without a start. You just refuse to acknowledge it is an intelligent being.

There is no need to argue over this. That is the only way we could be here today to discuss it.

a reply to: GailNot

God obviously had no beginning.

Obviously. Why obviously? Just because?

You just refuse to acknowledge it is an intelligent being.

I don't refuse.
I just don't see a point. Or evidence.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: GailNot

God obviously had no beginning.

Obviously. Why obviously? Just because?

You just refuse to acknowledge it is an intelligent being.

I don't refuse.
I just don't see a point. Or evidence.

If you don't know why I don't think I'd be able to explain it to you. Although I can tell you when I was 7 years old I could comprehend it. And when my children were around the same age they could understand it as well.

a reply to: Phage

And yet when you do an experiment in science you are making certain assumptions - You're assuming that the experiment is valid and you assume the results have meaning. Many assumptions - many results

"The scientist needs an artistically creative imagination."
- Max Planck.


“Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real”
– Niels Bohr
[like Max Planck a very famous physicist of the 20th Century]





“We are a way for the cosmos to know itself.” ― Carl Sagan, Cosmos

a reply to: AlienView

And yet when you do an experiment in science you are making certain assumptions

No. When you do an experiment in science you are seeking data which will either support or disprove your hypothesis.

Yes. Imagination is a big part of science. But assumptions are the bane of science.

Yes. It is hard to think of something which is of indeterminate location and status (sub atomic particles) as being "real". But they are, or at least, the models for them (models which men like Bohr created) work pretty well. The fact that those models work (as demonstrated by the medium by which we are communicating) shows that they are more than assumptions.

a reply to: GailNot

Although I can tell you when I was 7 years old I could comprehend it.

When I was 7 I believed in Santa. Critical thinking is not strong in kids of 7.