Intelligent Design Thoery


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Intelligent Design Thoery

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 22 · Next
Author Message
Profile Ex
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Mar 12
Posts: 2895
Credit: 1,720,671
RAC: 1,191
United States
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

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,274
RAC: 0
Korea, North
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.
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

bobby
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 1962
Credit: 14,720,609
RAC: 2,938
United States
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 ...

NickProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 11
Posts: 3900
Credit: 1,978,756
RAC: 1,055
United Kingdom
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.

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,013,603
RAC: 4,484
United States
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.

Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 3
United States
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.

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31339
Credit: 11,865,176
RAC: 22,871
United Kingdom
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!

Profile Aristoteles Doukas
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Apr 08
Posts: 1091
Credit: 2,140,913
RAC: 0
Finland
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

Profile Aristoteles Doukas
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Apr 08
Posts: 1091
Credit: 2,140,913
RAC: 0
Finland
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

Profile Ex
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Mar 12
Posts: 2895
Credit: 1,720,671
RAC: 1,191
United States
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

Profile betregerProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 2210
Credit: 4,636,539
RAC: 9,819
United States
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.
____________

bobby
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 1962
Credit: 14,720,609
RAC: 2,938
United States
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 ...

Profile betregerProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 2210
Credit: 4,636,539
RAC: 9,819
United States
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.
____________

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,013,603
RAC: 4,484
United States
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.

Profile soft^spirit
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6374
Credit: 28,630,954
RAC: 119
United States
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

bobby
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 1962
Credit: 14,720,609
RAC: 2,938
United States
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 ...

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 31339
Credit: 11,865,176
RAC: 22,871
United Kingdom
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?

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2503
Credit: 1,174,617
RAC: 129
United States
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

Tom95134
Send message
Joined: 27 Nov 01
Posts: 213
Credit: 3,328,853
RAC: 997
United States
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).

____________

Matt Giwer
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 21 May 00
Posts: 841
Credit: 990,879
RAC: 0
United States
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

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 22 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Intelligent Design Thoery

Copyright © 2014 University of California