Originally posted by Outlawstar

Listen Im all ears there but seriously the name ID is all that was invented, the concept is THOUSANDS of years old, believe me I know all bout how religion has abused its power to commit horrific acts, however, as I said earlier, science is getting there now, we are starting to see the emergence of a religio-scientific sub community, Im by NO means condemning the establishment as a whole or even implying there isint a political will factor behind the action of some scientists, however my point still stands.

Again, I am defending a curiosity, not a belief, who know in the future I may experiment with some things myself^___^

[edit on 6-11-2009 by Outlawstar]

…Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.”

Phillip E. Johnson, Discovery Institute

What evidence for ID have you seen that *can* be put to the test?

Can you cite any sources indicating that this is what the ancients believed, because I have never heard of this before today.

What did you mean by this statement then?

Yes I do, frankly, I believe the fact we have found life on our Earth is evidence that it is found EVERYWHERE!!

Do you have any evidence that it is found everywhere?

You agree with assumed numbers as statistical proof that life arising naturally is improbable on our own planet which real statistical observation says the probability is 1:1 as we have *not* discovered life elsewhere, but then you assume that life is probable elsewhere and that it had a hand in our own creation? Either your confused, or your confusing me. Please clarify your position as it makes no sense right now.

Quiet the contrary, which has lead me to state what I stated.

Do you have any evidence of any cover up of any alien life either in the past or in the present?

I see no evidence of any civilization equal to or greater than our own in the past history of our planet. Can you please cite any sources of evidence that may indicate I am wrong.

Every OOPART I have come across has already been debunked. Many mythologies are just that, mythologies. I also see no evidence of advanced modern knowledge in their writings at all.

Some theories utilize assumption in the capacity to explain observed facts, but those theories themselves can be prone to error, whereas the observed fact will still exist regardless of the theory getting it wrong. I hope that explains it a little better. I disagree that science is a control mechanism, discovering or attempting to learn how the universe came to be doesn't appear to me to contain any elements of control unless science is claimed to be a lie propagated by some great evil force trying to lie to us about some cosmic supernatural creator of the universe. Obviously that just sounds a tad bit silly.

Originally posted by Outlawstar

...If we can all agree there is a design to everything, which of course we can, there is a plan, an established set of laws, then doesint it follow that there has to be another mechanism behind the ones in this "dimension" which if driving these laws, constitutes something of a designer?

Hopefully you've decided for the right reasons and haven't just given up on the matter.

I don't think anyone is explicitly stating that, if there were evidence for ID in humans then we could postulate that the ID is from aliens from Tau Ceti. Which would be natural ID, it's just that there is no evidence for it, that's all.

The Egyptians were more than capable of moving and setting a few stone blocks. I've watched a video of some guy building his own Stonehenge without modern knowledge or technology. This guy is capable of moving up to thirty tonne stone blocks on his own with just a couple of pebble placed under it.

Einstein never said anything of the nature from what I remember. I know a lot of God believers have misquoted him over the years and some sites will continue that misquotation.

I agree to a point, but I have to disagree in whole. The whole of science is incapable of what you describe. You or I could easily become scientist, start our own experiments and write our own research papers. That doesn't inherently mean that you and I are also now part of some grand conspiracy or political-financial movement.

No problem, hope I meet up with out on another thread.

In the case of ID, pointing at something and saying "Too complex PNWED YOU!" is far from evidence. This is the biggest argument *for* ID. There is no actual evidence to interpret differently that would allude to a designer of any sorts.

I call BS on this for very good reasons. The pyramid blocks only weighed two to two and a half tonnes each, well withing the capabilities of primitive man to move. Mind you, primitive doesn't inherently imply stupid here. There are many stone age tribes in our own modern day and age that can readily be taught and dropped into modern life, they aren't any more stupid than we are, they just simply lack modern knowledge and technology. We also *can* build the pyramids, we have cranes capable of lifting well over two tonnes by many magnitudes. We have *no reason* to build such a large monument though.

I am not going to run around and look up every little thing that goes against what you think Einstein believed, I will leave that up to you.

Im just wondering if its possible to agree to a point but to disagree as a whole?

Yes, quiet possible. Certainly some members of the scientific community have been behind hoaxes and lies for their own financial gain, but the few doesn't apply to the whole scientific community.

Originally posted by templar knight
Here is Scientific evidence - how do these fit with intelligent design:
- Look at the fossil records, what we see by comparing the fossils from the age of the rock is that many million years ago there were plants, then we see in later fossil records, there were small land animals then larger land animals, suggesting that if ID did take palce it did not happen at a set time.
- Look at our bodies, we have imperfections - tonsils and appendix can be removed without any down side. We have imperfect sight, in most humans, our vision degrades after 20/30 going more to long sight sight. Childbirth is incredibly painful, so there are all sorts of imperfections on humans.
- Look at the DNA sequences, we can see that the eye has "been created" only 4 times and all animals share that DNA from all the animals shareone of these 4 patterens at its centre.

These 3 are scientific facts that -although happy to run with ID as a hypothesis get blown out of the water when confronted with fact.

Originally posted by Solomons
Intelligent design is not scientific because it has no evidence to support it...only faith. ID'ers have absolutely nothing...nadda to backup their claims. "God did it" is all intelligent design has. It's nothing short of embarrassing if im being honest, and people who adhere to intelligent design should also be ashamed. If they want to look credible and not simply a bunch delusional folks then get to work and write a paper on why intelligent design is a valid scientific theory and put it up for peer review. So far you have not while real science has been making strides and collecting thousands upon thousands of evidence to support evolution. And for the last time, saying you believe in micro evolution in one breath and then in the other saying you don't believe in macro just shows you have absolutely no clue as to how evolution works.

[edit on 7-11-2009 by Solomons]

I think I've asked you this before, what evidence is there for ID? Do you honestly think using the God of the gaps slanted arguments are really evidence for ID?

Actually, there is evidence that the Egyptians did it, they record themselves being the builders. We have tombs of the builders as evidence that not all of the builders were slaves, showing that the building of the structures was more socially complex than whipping slaves to make a pretty monument. We build thing's today many times more advanced in complexity and height with fewer men, so the claim that the Egyptians couldn't possibly stack a bunch of stones on top of each other is about as stupid as saying someone from the third world country couldn't possibly fly a plane into the twin towers. Primitive doesn't explicitly mean stupid. I had also given a link to that youtube video showing one man capable of quickly and effortlessly moving blocks of stone that weigh in much more than the pyramid blocks. Or are you going to claim that he couldn't have possibly be really doing that despite being on video?

I see no reason to assume that they didn't do it. We do thing's today that they couldn't even conceive as possible and there is no reason to assume that they couldn't do thing's we can't conceive as possible. If a more ancient and advanced civilization were the real builders, then where is all that advanced technology today? Why no records left over from their civilization, no technology, nothing? So advanced but they couldn't leave a single shred of actual verifiable evidence of their existence?

I said Einstein, not Newton.

Not irrelevant at all, it's like your demanding the whole scientific community has to be involved with something bad, including you and I if we ever joined the community. Just because someone writes a book poking fun at a few bad apples and misconstruing that to mean all peoples are the same while at the same time trying to incite an emotional response by stating how stupid do they think we are, doesn't make their argument valid.