Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
Intelligent design isn't an argument about origins (though it tries, with the aforementioned "all-powerful, all-creating, all-controlling entity
that I'm not SAYING is the christian god, wink wink nudge nudge") but rather an attempt to explain the diversity of species, as a counter-argument
Intelligent Design says that life
was designed -- thus it's clearly a statement regarding the origins of life
. Speciation was simply a
resulting and likely planned effect of the original design.
I.D.-denialists may strategically skirt around the issue of life's origins or insert their chance-of-the-gaps, but I.D. embraces it based entirely on
inductive reasoning and parsimony leading to the logical inference of design -- all science, all of the time.
I.D.'s only beef with evolution is "blind watchmaker" evolution, the kind of evolution which has become a religion of militant atheists like
Richard Dawkins. We find it to be both archaic and a plea to ignorance. What I mean by that is, we feel it strongly under-appreciates the current
discoveries in biology. The more we learn the more it's clear that life operates under a set of guidelines no different than our own universe. While
I.D.ists want to discover these laws and fully understand how the designer did it, including how life evolves, Darwinists would rather not. They'd
rather claim it's all random, thus unpredictable, throw out some vague references to natural selection, and call it a day.
I.D. is the more intellectually stimulating theory, and it also better confers with the evidence, meaning if it were to became the mainstream
paradigm, it would almost certainly be more fruitful than the b.s. we currently have.
As for the designer being the Christian God, those who are both Christian and followers of I.D. believe that to be the case (duh). Unfortunately it's
something which is currently lacking in concrete evidence, thus it must remain an open question.
A Christian is free to believe
that the designer is their God, however they're not free to insist
that to be the case.
Intelligent Design's not a massive Christian conspiracy but the modern-day resurgence of a scientific mindset that goes back millenia
clearly precedes Christianity, as the O.P. shows.
It's perfectly safe to now remove your tin-foil hat.
Originally posted by TheWalkingFoxNo, because again, the aliens and life would have come from something, and ID would be left trying to
explain the "creators" creator. Same as it currently does. ID is a paradoxical loop with no resolution.
Life was either designed or it was not. The origins of any purported designer(s) would be a secondary question with zero bearing on the original
What you're suggesting actually places scientific progress in a straight-jacket. You're saying that because all of the pieces haven't yet been
found, that science can't even begin to put together the puzzle. That's not how science works, friend. We put together what pieces we do have and
work from there, in a step-by-step fashion.
Step one is to accept the reality that life was designed (which upsets you, I know).
Step two is to figure out how life was designed, and how it has progressed towards an obvious goal (humanity) over the past 3.7 billion years.
Step three is to discover just who did the designing and, if we dare, ask why?
I.D.ists have taken step one and are now on step two. Unfortunately step two requires many resources, resources I.D.ists are currently lacking. This
is because mainstream science won't even take that first step due to personal agendas and worldview dogmatism, and as a result I.D. must work from an
extreme disadvantage, including a lack of government funding. Since the evidence supports I.D., that means all of science is suffering, too.
[edit on 2-3-2010 by Mista Kool]