Thread: Gallup Poll: 4 in 10 believe man created by God 10,000 years ago

Originally Posted by mhailey

My point was to dispell this issue that "intelligent design" is utterly unacademic and has no place in science.

So, you actually think the voice over 'commentary' at the end of the video is logically correct given the content it refers to?

Originally Posted by mhailey

In the end, whether you belive that life simply "popped" into existence as the "educated" amoung us belive, or you belive that God created life, you must do so on faith. And I would assert that to belive that life simply "popped" into existence takes greater faith than those that assert the position of inteligent design or creation.

Well, for those who lack an intellectual curiosity, or creativity, I suppose the 'intelligent design' is the perfect framework. One which provides a very simple and easy to understand answer to any question one may have, namely 'God just designed it this way'.
That doesn't make it science though, not even close. Science does have 'unknowns' and 'fundamental postulates' from which the rest derives, but it's constantly looking for any evidence to dispel with them. Any 'creator' based theory is just a renaming of the 'I don't know/care to know/understand' answer.

To take a page from the book of Jesus - 'by their fruit you will recognize them'.

Originally Posted by gugi

To take a page from the book of Jesus - 'by their fruit you will recognize them'.

Considering the New Testament teaches that Jesus was the creative force, I find this more than a little humorous...

Originally Posted by richmondesi

Considering the New Testament teaches that Jesus was the creative force, I find this more than a little humorous...

Yes, and as far as I remember, he rather forcefully challenged the well established understanding of what God and Messiah are all about.

Originally Posted by gugi

So, you actually think the voice over 'commentary' at the end of the video is logically correct given the content it refers to?


Well, for those who lack an intellectual curiosity, or creativity, I suppose the 'intelligent design' is the perfect framework. One which provides a very simple and easy to understand answer to any question one may have, namely 'God just designed it this way'.
That doesn't make it science though, not even close. Science does have 'unknowns' and 'fundamental postulates' from which the rest derives, but it's constantly looking for any evidence to dispel with them. Any 'creator' based theory is just a renaming of the 'I don't know/care to know/understand' answer.

To take a page from the book of Jesus - 'by their fruit you will recognize them'.

So you believe BY FAITH that life simply popped into existence. I believe by faith that God created life.

The difference is that I don't belittle your opinions, or call you stupid.

Also, thanks for finding the typo, and highlighting it in red, in large font, as if to show that I lack credibility due to such typo. Is that the sign of a gentleman?

By their fruit you will recognize them.

Matt

Originally Posted by mhailey

So you believe BY FAITH that life simply popped into existence. I believe by faith that God created life.

I don't. I just don't know and I don't need 'FAITH' to live with that fact. I find the framework which explains virtually everything in our material world as resulting from three basic particles interacting according a partial differential equation, far more satisfying than 'XXXX just made it this way'.
Not the least because it offers not only interesting exercise for the mind, but also because it has resulted in nifty things like cars, airplanes, computers, cell phones, GPS, internet, nuclear bombs, all kinds of medicines and medical devices, and not in the last place the reason I'm on this forum - some very nice straight razors.

Originally Posted by mhailey

The difference is that I don't belittle your opinions, or call you stupid.

I don't belittle anybody's opinions or beliefs, however I do have an issue when the black is called white or when a belief is called science. Everybody's free to live their life any way they like as long as they don't impose on others, but that necessitates that we say what we mean and mean what we say. So when one wants to use the words science and religion, they ought to know what those words mean and apply accordingly.

Originally Posted by mhailey

Also, thanks for finding the typo, and highlighting it in red, in large font, as if to show that I lack credibility due to such typo. Is that the sign of a gentleman?

I would've said 'you're welcome', but then it appears you actually meant the opposite of 'thanks'.
Actually it doesn't show any lack of credibility, just lack of a good spelling, or the use of a spell checker. But you just showed a talent for unreasonable extrapolation.

Top Ten Signs You're a Fundamentalist Christian

Friends.

Let us keep the discussion civil and gentlemanly.
Just a reminder.

Otto
For the Mod. Team.

Gentlemen, let me suggest that this thread needs to stay on topic. It's not headed in a positive direction at the present time. If the discussion continues to include personal criticism between the members I will be forced to lock it for a cooling off period.

Originally Posted by mhailey

My point was to dispell this issue that "intelligent design" is utterly unacademic and has no place in science.

It doesn't have a place. There is no evidence for it. As it is now it's the same as saying "I don't know".

Originally Posted by mhailey

In the end, whether you belive that life simply "popped" into existence as the "educated" amoung us belive, or you belive that God created life, you must do so on faith.

The educated agree that how life started is still an unknown. There is no faith needed.

Originally Posted by mhailey

And I would assert that to belive that life simply "popped" into existence takes greater faith than those that assert the position of inteligent design or creation.

Saying life "popped" into existence sounds pretty much like saying God did it.

And what do you mean by life? Because it's most likely that life started off very very simple. It also had a very long time to evolve.

Originally Posted by mhailey

My point was to dispell this issue that "intelligent design" is utterly unacademic and has no place in science.

In the end, whether you belive that life simply "popped" into existence as the "educated" amoung us belive, or you belive that God created life, you must do so on faith. And I would assert that to belive that life simply "popped" into existence takes greater faith than those that assert the position of inteligent design or creation.

Nobody who is educated says that life just "popped" into existence, nor does evolution even propose to have an answer for the origin of life. I don't know where you learned that, but you were taught wrong.

Intelligent design has no place in the academic community because there is no evidence for it. Science is about building our knowledge based on observational facts, not myths and fairy tales.

If religions want to have discussions about intelligent design, that's great. That is where it belongs. But as there is no evidence for it, there is not way to test it as a hypothesis, there is no way that any kind of theory of "intelligent design" would accurately predict natural phenomena we see in the world around us, it has no place in the scientific community.