I am curious to see how strong people's faith are. The great biologist J. B. S Haldane was once asked what it would take to disprove evolution and he famously responded a rabbit from the Cambrian era. So what's the equivalent of a rabbit from the Cambrian era for you intelligent design people?
2007-03-27 07:37:09 · 15 answers · asked by hyungbinkim 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
There is no equivalent! Intelligent design can not be disprove as easy as evolution.
2007-03-27 07:45:58 · answer #1 · answered by MadDog 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This has already been done.
It is the FSM--which is an ALTERNATIVE 'intelligent design' concocted by a young man who wanted it taught alongside the creation theory AND evolution in Kansas. The advent of a Flying Spaghetti Monster religious approach caused the board to throw out the creation approach.
The 'smoking gun' is that there can be any number of creation stories, each more fanciful than the last. In fact, each person is invited to make up a story on the spot when faced with an 'intelligent design' aficionado.
2007-03-27 07:48:05 · answer #2 · answered by nora22000 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Skew Hoyles math to come out something other than 1 in 10 to the 40,000 power.
"The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40 thousand [zeros] after it. It is enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primordial soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence." - Sir Fredrick Hoyle, Nature Nov. 1981
"When it comes to the origins of life there are only two possibilities: Creation or spontaneous generation. There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved hundreds of years ago, but that leads us to only one other conclusion, that of supernatural creation." - George Wald, The Origin of Life, Scientific American May 1954
2007-03-27 07:40:27 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
jetsfreak84... i'm wondering you made that a million in a million,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00... up. anyhow, solid ingredient there are that many stars accessible. Kinda places a damper on your common sense would not it. it would not count number number how uncommon Earth is (that you have not any logical foundation for assuming that's amazingly uncommon), there are quadrillions of stars and particular a number of planets round each and each celeb. the probabilities of a existence protecting planet are in reality VERY intense in our universe. id isn't a medical theory. that's a set of BS previous, bunked, and re-bunked archives and a set of round common sense. It became purely created to satisfy Bible thumpers who've no purpose of taking there head out of their scripture lengthy sufficient to verify a paragraph out of a technological awareness textbook. the purely reason in the back of the mild reaching us from billions of light years away that I have heard became that God despatched the photons on their way on the starting up with the intention to make it appear as if the universe is 13.7 billion years previous. The ridiculousness of this aside, if that is actual there is not any rationalization why we shouldn't anticipate the universe isn't 13.7 billion years previous.. each and each of the expertise we've collected depending on the obtrusive age of the universe continues to be sensible no count number number if it became flashed into existence 6,000 years in the past or a million second in the past. If I see a mountain i anticipate it became produced from tectonic plates operating over one yet another, extraordinarily at the same time as each and each of the information helps it. that's nonsensical to commence making wild accusations like per chance some tremendous being flashed it into existence with the intention to make it appear as if it became made through organic tectonic approaches. --------------------------------------... *THE info* there's a fashion designer of the universe. there could be some intelligence previous our personal who engineered the universe we see in the present day, yet there is not any reason to anticipate there is accordingly that's unfaithful till shown in the different case. The argument "each thing needs a author" is ridiculous. If each thing needs a author than who created the author? If the author isn't depending on time than why ought to the creation of the universe be depending on time?
2016-12-02 21:55:40 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't have a genuine answer to your question...I'll just leave you with some words of wisdom:
"The known is finite, the uknown is infinite; intellectually we stand on an islet in the midst of an illimitable ocean of inexplicability. Our business in every generation is to reclaim a little more land." T.H. Huxley
2007-03-27 07:46:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Intelligent design has been disproved many times. Every time its supporters bring up fresh 'evidence' for ID, it is shot down in flames. However, this doesn't seem to change the views of the fundies who believe in ID. They will continue to ignore evidence, because they will only ever accept that their god created everything.
Atheism. You know it makes sense.
2007-03-27 07:43:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Nothing. They cling to this dogma and it has nothing to do with an objective appraisal of any evidence. They've got all their rhetoric and stock answers that they get from creationist websites and that is like a comfort blanket to them- it bolsters their unquestioning belief in creationism and the fact that much of it is illogical doesn't concern them.
2007-03-27 07:43:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Esther's response (above) says it all.
There is nothing that can change her faith... and she's (sadly) very proud of it. This is the kind of mentality that many theists posess. You cannot rationalize with them when it comes to their faith. (on other subjects, they can be quite rational... strangely enough)
2007-03-27 07:43:59 · answer #8 · answered by Morey000 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
When someone can tell me how matter can create information?
When someone can tell me where the
so-called 'cosmic egg' came from?
When someone can tell me how life can spontaneously generate itself, of its own accord, from inanimate matter?
When someone can give me a satisfactory, materialist reason for the purpose of our existence?
2007-03-27 07:45:55 · answer #9 · answered by A.M.D.G 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There is nothing that can undermine my faith in Jesus, God, or that the bible is the inspired word of God and that I can stand on it as true.
I don't mean disrespect to scientists or whatever. They can say what they like and claim what they like, I will not be moved.
2007-03-27 07:40:28 · answer #10 · answered by Esther 7 · 5⤊ 3⤋