shvu 1 Report post Posted November 14, 2005 Here is a part of the Quixotic Message, which is humor created around the ID theory a couple of years ago. The complete list can be found on the web with background for most points. Have fun! ------------- ID is whatever we say it is, and we don't agree. Greater and greater numbers of scientists are joining the ID movement, which is why we keep referring to the same three year after year (Dembski, Wells and Behe). We're not creationists, except for those of us who are, but the rest of us won't confirm that we're not. But if you call us creationists, we'll complain to no end. ID is a scientific theory for detecting purpose and teleology in nature. But don't ask us what that purpose is, because that's a religious question that's separate from ID. The Designer could be anything from God to a space alien. But the Raelians, who believe it was a space alien, are being illogical. Darwinism can't explain the evolution of life in every single detail, therefore it's wrong. But don't ask IDists to explain these things, because that's not the kind of theory ID is. Darwinists (Also read atheists) are responsible for both socialism and laissez-faire capitalism. Both racism and liberalism. Both feminism and sexism. Both animal research and the animal rights movement. And Commie-Nazism Philosophers cannot agree on exactly where the line between science and non-science lies. Therefore, anything can be considered science if we say so. If a living system looks well designed, it's evidence for ID. If it looks poorly designed, that's just because we have no way of knowing what constitutes good and bad design A good scientific theory like ID should be vague and ambiguous, and refuse to propose any specific details about mechanism or history. Some unspecified being "designed" something, somewhere, at some point in time, somehow, is a perfectly good explanation. The argument from design is not a theological argument, because we aren't necessarily talking about God. But any rebuttal of the design argument is theological, because it requires us to say "God wouldn't do it this way", and this is not legitimate It was very nice of our loving Designer to design an immune system to protect us from the deadly diseases He designed. The fundamental unity of living things means that there is only one Designer. The extraordinary variation among living things, including their tendency to kill each other, just means that our singular Designer is very creative and whimsical. ----- Cheers Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 14, 2005 Many scientists reject evolution http://www.arn.org/docs2/news/100scientists0929.htm http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/origins/quotes/ http://www.evolutionisdead.com/quotes.php?QID=354&cr=69(right hand side} This website brings all of the scientific evidence against evolution from numerous scientists in one easy to read online presentation. http://theunjustmedia.com/darwinism%20refuted%20a_short_history.htm Due to blind faith in propaganda from commited atheists who promote evolution for philosophical and political reasons the intellectually lazy and easily fooled sector of society accepts evolutionary theory despite their lack of study on the topic. They don't know anything about evolution nor do they know anything about Intelligent Design. They simply accept "argument from authority". They don't realize that they are backing a theory which has been disproven for some time now by numerous scientists who are professionals in every field associated with evolution. Time to separate the men from the boys. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
