237
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 940:
Line 940: +
Talk:Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (view source)
Revision as of 18:27, November 15, 2008
, 18:27, November 15, 2008→ID vs. Evolution: That wasn't even a nice try.
:Of those options I choose number one, its the clear answer; we just don't know yet. We have some ideas (and probably the first organism wasn't that complex, everything we see today is the result of billions of years of evolution) and some evidence that looks fairly inviting (miller-urey)but we just don't know and anyone who tries to convince you otherwise doesn't have the scientific community behind them. One of the other charges against expelled is that Ben Stein asked various scientists to tell him about some of the hypotheses for abiogenesis and then he portrayed them as what these scientists accepted as verified fact rather than as the educated guesses that they are. --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 15:08, 14 November 2008 (EST)
:Of those options I choose number one, its the clear answer; we just don't know yet. We have some ideas (and probably the first organism wasn't that complex, everything we see today is the result of billions of years of evolution) and some evidence that looks fairly inviting (miller-urey)but we just don't know and anyone who tries to convince you otherwise doesn't have the scientific community behind them. One of the other charges against expelled is that Ben Stein asked various scientists to tell him about some of the hypotheses for abiogenesis and then he portrayed them as what these scientists accepted as verified fact rather than as the educated guesses that they are. --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 15:08, 14 November 2008 (EST)
:: From my observation, most would go for options 1 ''and'' 4. And that includes much of the scientific community.[http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/703/],[http://creationontheweb.com/todd] [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:03, 15 November 2008 (EST)
:: From my observation, most would go for options 1 ''and'' 4. And that includes much of the scientific community.[http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/703/],[http://creationontheweb.com/todd] [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:03, 15 November 2008 (EST)
::: Do you people read references before you post them? Both of those quotes are talking about methodological naturalism. The Divine hypothesis accommodate every single bit of evidence imaginable, and because of that we got very little science done because people were happy saying that God did it, but once we gave that up and choose to look for only natural causes to things science accelerated. In the first quote he talks about science not meeting its promises and just so stories, the not meeting there promises part is about us not having teleporters and androids and power too cheap to meter. The just so stories are possible explanations for how something might logically have evolved, since evolution is driven by every little thing in there surroundings and a bit of chance (its not completely random, but like everything chance is involved) and we really have no chance to figure that stuff out yet. The God hypothesis is a science stopper, once you accept that you stop learning, we have seen it again and again and the DI's inability to produce any new science is even more proof of it. --[[User:Brendanw|Brendanw]] 13:27, 15 November 2008 (EST)