Intelligent design or natural selection which one is right?.

mellman01

Intelligent design or natural selection which one is right?.

For me I go for Darwin my reasoning, well if you have seen some of the messed up genetics floating about on Jeremy Kyle there’s nothing intelligent about it, proof positive that it’s totally random, unless god has a evil sense of humour that is!.

mellman01

That's a bit hard on dogs isn't it?!

robertls

rehab44 wrote:

Explain?

Dogma ????

mellman01

Yep Rob got it I tell you one thing I would love to go to the Intelligent design theme park that’s in the US, boy would that be a hoot!.

joanlawson

rehab44 wrote:

Creationism is not a theory and it is certainly not a science; it is a dogma, a set of religious beliefs masquerading as something which it is not. It claims to “explain” by appeals to a “sacred” text, by appeals to an absolute, omnipotent authority, and whenever gaps appear in the “explanations,” we are told that “God works in mysterious ways.”

Creationism is, in short, what Richard Dawkins calls “a virus of the mind.” People are free, more or less, to believe what they wish, but the strategy of demanding the disproof of unverifiable assertions is counterproductive and, in the end, a rejection of the very foundations of knowledge. I can assert that there are green unicorns on a planetary system in the galaxy of Andromeda and, if you then challenge my claim, I can insist that you prove that there aren’t, a meaningless and idle enterprise.

Well, you've lost me, using all those big words :!: :shock: Maybe I'm not intelligent enough :?:

annie_mial

joanlawson wrote:

rehab44 wrote:

Creationism is not a theory and it is certainly not a science; it is a dogma, a set of religious beliefs masquerading as something which it is not. It claims to “explain” by appeals to a “sacred” text, by appeals to an absolute, omnipotent authority, and whenever gaps appear in the “explanations,” we are told that “God works in mysterious ways.”

Creationism is, in short, what Richard Dawkins calls “a virus of the mind.” People are free, more or less, to believe what they wish, but the strategy of demanding the disproof of unverifiable assertions is counterproductive and, in the end, a rejection of the very foundations of knowledge. I can assert that there are green unicorns on a planetary system in the galaxy of Andromeda and, if you then challenge my claim, I can insist that you prove that there aren’t, a meaningless and idle enterprise.

Well, you've lost me, using all those big words :!: :shock: Maybe I'm not intelligent enough :?:

I tried to read it, Joan, it made my brain go numb. How did green unicorns get in there?

Annie

robertls

annie_mial wrote:

joanlawson wrote:

rehab44 wrote:

Creationism is not a theory and it is certainly not a science; it is a dogma, a set of religious beliefs masquerading as something which it is not. It claims to “explain” by appeals to a “sacred” text, by appeals to an absolute, omnipotent authority, and whenever gaps appear in the “explanations,” we are told that “God works in mysterious ways.”

Creationism is, in short, what Richard Dawkins calls “a virus of the mind.” People are free, more or less, to believe what they wish, but the strategy of demanding the disproof of unverifiable assertions is counterproductive and, in the end, a rejection of the very foundations of knowledge. I can assert that there are green unicorns on a planetary system in the galaxy of Andromeda and, if you then challenge my claim, I can insist that you prove that there aren’t, a meaningless and idle enterprise.

Well, you've lost me, using all those big words :!: :shock: Maybe I'm not intelligent enough :?:

I tried to read it, Joan, it made my brain go numb. How did green unicorns get in there?

Annie

What!!!!!
You never heard of 'Green Unicorn Syndrome'???

Rob x

joanlawson

rehab44 wrote:

Creationism is not a theory and it is certainly not a science; it is a dogma, a set of religious beliefs masquerading as something which it is not. It claims to “explain” by appeals to a “sacred” text, by appeals to an absolute, omnipotent authority, and whenever gaps appear in the “explanations,” we are told that “God works in mysterious ways.”

Creationism is, in short, what Richard Dawkins calls “a virus of the mind.” People are free, more or less, to believe what they wish, but the strategy of demanding the disproof of unverifiable assertions is counterproductive and, in the end, a rejection of the very foundations of knowledge. I can assert that there are green unicorns on a planetary system in the galaxy of Andromeda and, if you then challenge my claim, I can insist that you prove that there aren’t, a meaningless and idle enterprise.

OK I'll be brave and have a go.

Creationism is a set of religious beliefs, and religions are based on faith. If your faith is strong, you do believe that God works in mysterious ways which we mere mortals can never fully comprehend.

If you tell me that there are green unicorns on a planetary system in the galaxy of Andromeda, I can't prove that there aren't, but I could have faith that there are. Faith isn't based on absolute scientific knowledge, but it is valid nontheless.

Joan

joanlawson

Also deleted to keep the peace. :!:

joanlawson

Thank you Derek. I have also deleted. I agree that we should let it lie now, and no hard feelings.

Joan