UNintelligent Design
I came across this article in my daily surfing. Very interesting refute of the basic idea behind ID, that things about humans are too perfect to be random. I've never understood that argument at all and this article certainly destroys any illusion of the human design being perfect.
The author wrote a little song:
My bones proclaim a story of incompetent design.And even better - if you wanna have a laugh, people even sang this - totally out of tune.
My back still hurts, my sinus clogs, my teeth just won’t align.
If I had drawn the blueprint, I would cer-tain-ly resign.
Incompetent Design!
Evo-Evo-Evo-lution! Design is but a mere illusion.
Darwin sparked our revolution. Science SHALL prevail!
Have fun ... just because we can't explain all things, doesn't mean we need to invent a supernatural being incharge of "the unexplained". As time has showed over and over again, we somehow always find out that behind everything is no magic being pulling a lot of threads, but basic law of natures which we can even reproduce ourselves.
posted by The Alter Ego @ 3:55 PM
9 comments
9 Comments:
It certainly is unfortunate that with all that natural selection and survival of the fittest, evolution hasn't managed to work out those bugs either :)
And you should call the New York Times to let them know how you managed to "reproduce" nonlinving into living matter, or the conversion of a fish into an amphibian.
You seem to confuse matters. Only religion claims to have all the answers - when it so clearly is both wrong and missing. Only religion claims that humans are perfectly designed, when (as this article shows) we aren't designed perfectly.
And you should take a little time to review the recently concluded Dover case and read about what ID is _not_: science.
I'm not trying to make a case for ID here. I'm just saying if evolution is totally legit, these same "imperfect" characteristics of humanity would certainly have been eradicated.
And to insure YOU'RE not confusing matters, either, I can't speak for all "religion-dom." But I can tell Christianity does teach that everything God made was "good" and perfectly designed. The entrance of evil is what would lead to an imperfect or fallen quality in His creation.
If one of your biggest defenses for evolution is reproducible results (which I suspect it is by the number of times you mention it), you're going to have to do a lot better.
I don't follow your reasoning. How are you relating the legacy of evolution to correcting imperfect design? How are you relating reproduction etc. to the theory of evolution? As you know, evolution has NOTHING to do with the origins of life. If you want to see how human intelligence have improved natural products, just look at farming and geneticially produced crops.
It looks like to me, that your assumption of perfection was made before you looked at the evidence and you cannot accept what you find, unless it fits your initial assumption. That's fine for religion but doesn't work for science. Don't expect that the real world is perfect, just because you believe it was made so by your God.
Again, go back to the Dover trail - read the transcripts. You'll find that evolution is a matter of fact, as close as we can come to it. That we don't have all the pieces to the puzzle, doesn't mean we can't tell what the puzzle is showing. I know ID people would like to claim that unless the puzzle is 100% complete it doesn't count - well, that's their problem. I just hope they don't fall off the earth, because even gravity isn't 100%.
The very definition of evolution is tied to the word "develop," the idea that organisms become more complex, or better. Am I wrong on this? I wasn't trying to make a bold scientific statement, just trying to be humorous (and failing as usual). To me it's a little suspect that millions of years also haven't corrected the problems Wise points out.
Many experts suggest, for example, that jaws are smaller now than they used to be because human children mature faster; not that too many teeth were jammed in to begin with.
I'm also not arguing that evolution has much to do with the origin of life.
I "assume" a good/flawless design because I believe in the Bible; I'm not trying re-form any evidence. You're right, the world isn't perfect NOW; and I've already explained why that is.
When I mentioned the word "reproducible," I wasn't talking about "reproduction." I'm talking about science -- your favorite word :) I can accept that not every piece of the puzzle must be in place to adopt a theory. But evolution sure must leave a lot of question for someone like you that's so concerned with reproducible results (theories that come through in a lab test).
Let me ask again: "How are you relating the legacy of evolution to correcting imperfect design?" This time, try to answer instead of diverting.
Either you subscribe to evolution or you don't. Don't try to proclaim that God first designed things, and now things all of a sudden start changing without it? NOBODY has said there was somekind of intelligence behind changes in inherent in evolution. Only ID proponents thinks that's necessary.
OK, I'm going to have to end this exchange for now. I obviously don't understand how you want me to answer the question, and I don't care for being accused of "diverting." I do attempt to address your questions directly, whether you see it that way or not. This is not my area of expertise, but I do the best I can and you'll agree I'm a pretty good sport. Re-read my first paragraph; I asked YOU if I was going wrong and you didn't answer. I wish I better understood what you were asking, but I don't. We'll talk later...
hey. thank you very much for your comment to my post.
I have replied, and if you like, you can take a look. We can talk about this if you want to! =)
Medical science has prevented natural selection from working since we must save every flawed being.
Not all life is worth saving.
Orginized religion is the root of all evil.
Post a Comment
<< Home