Intelligent Design Thoery

Message boards : Politics : Intelligent Design Thoery

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 22 · Next

Author	Message
Ex Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 12 Mar 12 Posts: 2883 Credit: 1,185,542 RAC: 1,019	Message 1222640 - Posted: 24 Apr 2012, 3:45:23 UTC Last modified: 24 Apr 2012, 3:47:11 UTC
	This thread is NOT for me! It is started in reply to a member's thoughts that Intelligent Design be taught in public schools' science classes. The question was asked: [paraphrase] "Do you know what Allegory is?" from wiki: ...Allegory is generally treated as a figure of rhetoric; a rhetorical allegory is a demonstrative form of representation conveying meaning other than the words that are spoken... It sounds to me that creationism in public school is allegory... ____________ -Dave #2 3.2.0-33
	ID: 1222640 ·

skildude Send message Joined: 4 Oct 00 Posts: 8973 Credit: 37,823,989 RAC: 43,661	Message 1222651 - Posted: 24 Apr 2012, 4:15:18 UTC - in response to Message 1222640.
	If one were to point out that the 7 days of creation actually fit into the correct order of how we know things were created on earth, then we'd have a debate on the basics of evolution being taught in the bible. Remember that JPII declared that evolution and creation are not at opposition. but enhances the knowledge of both. ____________ Proud member of TSWB. End terrorism by building a school
	ID: 1222651 ·

bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 1714 Credit: 13,406,465 RAC: 3,235	Message 1222991 - Posted: 25 Apr 2012, 1:18:45 UTC - in response to Message 1222651. Last modified: 25 Apr 2012, 1:18:57 UTC
	If one were to point out that the 7 days of creation actually fit into the correct order of how we know things were created on earth, then we'd have a debate on the basics of evolution being taught in the bible. Remember that JPII declared that evolution and creation are not at opposition. but enhances the knowledge of both. I didn't notice many scientists supporting JPII's claim. If you ask me, he was smart enough to realize the writing was on the wall, and this was an attempt to save face. Oh, and the order in Genesis does not fit in with the "correct" order: 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth 1:2 Now the earth was without shape and empty, and darkness was over the surface of the watery deep, but the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the water. 1:3 God said, "Let there be light." And there was light! 1:4 God saw that the light was good, so God separated the light from the darkness. 1:5 God called the light "day" and the darkness "night." There was evening, and there was morning, marking the first day. Science says the order of day 1 ought to be in fairly quick succession light then dark, a little while later water, a long time later Earth Age of Earth, about 4.54 billion years, time since the bright light of the Big Bang, about 13.75 billion years. Age of oldest oxygen atoms about 13 billion years old (formed in the first helium burning stars). First water molecules formed about 11 billion years ago, after the first star to go nova. In Genesis Day 2 is sky, Day 3 plants, Day 4 stars, Day 5 animals, and 6 is mankind. The order from science is stars (part of the early Day 1), sky (sometime after Earth), single celled organisms, sometime later plants and animals, and then mankind. So Day 6 is in the right place, and I guess 1 out of 6 is not bad (ok 1 and a half, for the animals). ____________ I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...
	ID: 1222991 ·

Nick Send message Joined: 11 Oct 11 Posts: 2767 Credit: 1,551,177 RAC: 1,845	Message 1223008 - Posted: 25 Apr 2012, 2:09:33 UTC Last modified: 25 Apr 2012, 2:14:31 UTC
	1:3 God said, "Let there be light." And there was light! Just think, if this part were to be true and that light in the universe was created a little later after the universe was forming then there was no law of E=M(C)sqd. Hence the universe was able to expand without the constraints of (C) holding it's rate of expansion back then until the time when light was created, then all changed. ____________ The Kite Fliers -------------------- Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.
	ID: 1223008 ·

BarryAZ Send message Joined: 1 Apr 01 Posts: 2480 Credit: 7,682,351 RAC: 7,783	Message 1223042 - Posted: 25 Apr 2012, 4:04:56 UTC - in response to Message 1222991. Last modified: 25 Apr 2012, 4:05:56 UTC
	There are actually two creation mythologies in Genesis -- most folks are only familiar with the first one. "There are significant parallels between the two stories, but also significant differences: in the first account mankind (male and female) are created after animals, while in the second the man is created first, then animals, and finally the woman "as the climax of creation." Together this combination of parallel character and contrasting profile point to the different origin of materials in Genesis 1:1–1:2–3 and 2:4b–3:23, however elegantly they have now been combined." Of course, not being an ID guy, the differences between one 'absolute' version and the other 'absolute' version don't trouble me one bit.
	ID: 1223042 ·

Intelligent Design Send message Joined: 9 Apr 12 Posts: 2086 Credit: 28,567 RAC: 0	Message 1223085 - Posted: 25 Apr 2012, 5:56:19 UTC
	It's late. When it's late I make spelling booboo's and then get blamed for being someone Im not.
	ID: 1223085 ·

Chris S Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Nov 00 Posts: 23367 Credit: 4,633,797 RAC: 3,929	Message 1223125 - Posted: 25 Apr 2012, 11:19:38 UTC Last modified: 25 Apr 2012, 12:04:27 UTC
	The reason that we have day and night is that the earth revolves once every 24 hours. At a fixed point on the surface of the earth, you are directly facing the sun at midday or facing directly away from it at midnight. It is the sun that provides the light we know as daytime, and the lack of that sunshine is what we call night-time. To proclaim "Let there be light, and there was light!" can only be taken to mean to create the Sun, or the star known as Sol, hence the Sol-ar system. All this pre-supposes that the earth was in existence before the sun was created, which scientifically is nonsense. Then we have "God saw that the light was good, so God separated the light from the darkness". That again pre-supposes that the earth was static and not revolving, so God apparently started the earth turning on its axis. So, in the beginning there was planet earth, all on its own standing still in space, then in 7 days we suddenly have a new star, rotation of the planet, fauna and flora, animals and mankind. Compressing billions of years of evolution into such a short time isn't bad for a weeks work. And I assume that all the other planets were as a result of a bit of overtime at time and a half. Genesis has to be taken with a very large pinch of salt! P.S. Hey Bobby, liked your post, good one!
	ID: 1223125 ·

Aristoteles Doukas Send message Joined: 11 Apr 08 Posts: 1091 Credit: 2,140,184 RAC: 26	Message 1223196 - Posted: 25 Apr 2012, 16:49:57 UTC - in response to Message 1223125.
	Then we have "God saw that the light was good, so God separated the light from the darkness". ! fairly stupid god if he has to create light before "allknowing god" can tell that light is good. ____________ "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exist elsewhere in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." Calvin to the Hobbes
	ID: 1223196 ·

Aristoteles Doukas Send message Joined: 11 Apr 08 Posts: 1091 Credit: 2,140,184 RAC: 26	Message 1223197 - Posted: 25 Apr 2012, 16:51:24 UTC - in response to Message 1223125.
	Genesis has to be taken with a very large pinch of salt! you can´t, salt is lethal in such doses. ____________ "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exist elsewhere in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." Calvin to the Hobbes
	ID: 1223197 ·

Ex Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 12 Mar 12 Posts: 2883 Credit: 1,185,542 RAC: 1,019	Message 1223220 - Posted: 25 Apr 2012, 17:36:42 UTC - in response to Message 1223197.
	Genesis has to be taken with a very large pinch of salt! you can´t, salt is lethal in such doses. +1 ____________ -Dave #2 3.2.0-33
	ID: 1223220 ·

betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 1163 Credit: 2,069,552 RAC: 2,190	Message 1223268 - Posted: 25 Apr 2012, 20:48:31 UTC Last modified: 25 Apr 2012, 20:49:05 UTC
	ID sort of sounds like science fiction. ____________
	ID: 1223268 ·

bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 1714 Credit: 13,406,465 RAC: 3,235	Message 1223278 - Posted: 25 Apr 2012, 21:12:08 UTC - in response to Message 1223268.
	ID sort of sounds like science fiction. Depends on the science fiction, some of it attempts to adhere to current scientific theories. ID doesn't even try. ____________ I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...
	ID: 1223278 ·

betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 1163 Credit: 2,069,552 RAC: 2,190	Message 1223356 - Posted: 25 Apr 2012, 23:59:50 UTC - in response to Message 1223278. Last modified: 26 Apr 2012, 0:00:09 UTC
	ID sort of sounds like science fiction. Depends on the science fiction, some of it attempts to adhere to current scientific theories. ID doesn't even try. Many book stores put the fantasy in with the science fiction. ____________
	ID: 1223356 ·

BarryAZ Send message Joined: 1 Apr 01 Posts: 2480 Credit: 7,682,351 RAC: 7,783	Message 1223408 - Posted: 26 Apr 2012, 2:25:27 UTC - in response to Message 1223356.
	Indeed, but where do they place Intelligent Design? ID sort of sounds like science fiction. Depends on the science fiction, some of it attempts to adhere to current scientific theories. ID doesn't even try. Many book stores put the fantasy in with the science fiction.
	ID: 1223408 ·

soft^spirit Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 6231 Credit: 27,539,417 RAC: 1,234	Message 1223413 - Posted: 26 Apr 2012, 2:33:30 UTC - in response to Message 1223408.
	Indeed, but where do they place Intelligent Design? ID sort of sounds like science fiction. Depends on the science fiction, some of it attempts to adhere to current scientific theories. ID doesn't even try. Many book stores put the fantasy in with the science fiction. I do not think they have an oxymoron section.... ____________ Janice
	ID: 1223413 ·

bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 1714 Credit: 13,406,465 RAC: 3,235	Message 1223419 - Posted: 26 Apr 2012, 3:03:28 UTC - in response to Message 1223413.
	Indeed, but where do they place Intelligent Design? ID sort of sounds like science fiction. Depends on the science fiction, some of it attempts to adhere to current scientific theories. ID doesn't even try. Many book stores put the fantasy in with the science fiction. I do not think they have an oxymoron section.... Though they likely have a round filing cabinet. ____________ I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...
	ID: 1223419 ·

Chris S Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Nov 00 Posts: 23367 Credit: 4,633,797 RAC: 3,929	Message 1223497 - Posted: 26 Apr 2012, 7:46:21 UTC
	Though they likely have a round filing cabinet. Would that be the one out the back with a metal lid?
	ID: 1223497 ·

William Rothamel Send message Joined: 25 Oct 06 Posts: 2145 Credit: 1,088,132 RAC: 9	Message 1223506 - Posted: 26 Apr 2012, 8:21:41 UTC - in response to Message 1223497. Last modified: 26 Apr 2012, 8:23:08 UTC
	Evolution results in an "intelligent" design most of the time. If it doesn't the species quickly dies out. reading some of this stuff makes me worry about homo sapiens. It's the saps thing that scares me the most. another good mini-rant by Daddio
	ID: 1223506 ·

Tom95134 Send message Joined: 27 Nov 01 Posts: 205 Credit: 2,748,116 RAC: 1,432	Message 1223632 - Posted: 26 Apr 2012, 17:29:51 UTC - in response to Message 1222651.
	If one were to point out that the 7 days of creation actually fit into the correct order of how we know things were created on earth, then we'd have a debate on the basics of evolution being taught in the bible. Remember that JPII declared that evolution and creation are not at opposition, but enhances the knowledge of both. Yes, but JPII was a lot more sensible than the current crop of creationists who want all or nothing. Indeed, but where do they place Intelligent Design? Right next to the other mythological writings (as they should be). ____________
	ID: 1223632 ·

Matt Giwer Send message Joined: 21 May 00 Posts: 687 Credit: 935,154 RAC: 159	Message 1224208 - Posted: 28 Apr 2012, 3:07:50 UTC
	The problem with intelligent design has two parts. If we give the creationists their designer then it is trivial to demonstrate the designer is either incompetent or malevolent and anyone wearing glasses knows it for a fact. ____________ Unvarnished Haaretz Jerusalem Post The origin of the Yahweh Cult
	ID: 1224208 ·

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 22 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Intelligent Design Thoery