The article is three pages; it's definitely worth a read.
To: wallcrawlr; DaveLoneRanger
2 posted on
12/02/2005 4:54:01 PM PST by
Michael_Michaelangelo
(The best theory is not ipso facto a good theory. Lots of links on my homepage...)
To: Michael_Michaelangelo
In December 2004 New Mexico Public Television scheduled, advertised and then, under pressure, canceled a documentary explaining the scientific case for a theory of biological origins known as intelligent design. Not a scientific case, but a political case for ID.
In the same month, a renowned British philosopher, Antony Flew, made worldwide news when he repudiated a lifelong commitment to atheism, citing among other factors, evidence of intelligent design in the DNA molecule.
Yes, Flew became a Deist. So what?
4 posted on
12/02/2005 5:04:46 PM PST by
balrog666
(A myth by any other name is still inane.)
To: Michael_Michaelangelo
Again, I'm maybe opening a can of worms, But I'm just observing.
The article seems to be a little narrow minded in the description of DNA and RNA as a direction toward intelligent design.
As with any multi cell organisms (man is one), one function (DNA and RNA) is not self contained to create it's function. There are other chemicals and cells in the organism that cause the actions of these cells to function. This is complex, but with many variations, is possible.
Just because it is not know why the structure is so complex, is no reason to support the intelligent design theory. complexity is part of the universe not only in biological, but in geology, chemistry, and physics. In the last 40 years great strides have been seen in staring deeper in the complex structure of these fields. It takes time and effort to go even deeper. It took Millennium to just get the structure of a virus for example.
What would be the intelligent design for redundant organs in animals ? (Appendix or The Reptilian Brain for example)
6 posted on
12/02/2005 5:51:43 PM PST by
Tinman73
(Human nature requires We forget the terrible things We see. A truly intelligent person remembers it)
To: Michael_Michaelangelo
"Intelligent Design" is neither.
7 posted on
12/02/2005 6:58:45 PM PST by
MindBender26
(Having my own CAR-15 in RVN meant never having to say I was sorry......)
To: Michael_Michaelangelo
8 posted on
12/02/2005 9:45:09 PM PST by
LiteKeeper
(Beware the secularization of America)
To: Michael_Michaelangelo
Can't the National Post afford a proof reader?
More recently, the Pope, the President of the United States and the Dalai Lama have each weigh in on the subject.
According to Darwinian biologists such as Oxford's Richard Dawkins, livings systems "give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose."
I know you guys have declared war on science, but must the English language be collateral damage?
To: Michael_Michaelangelo
More recently, the Pope, the President of the United States and the Dalai Lama have each weigh in on the subject. I still need to hear from Dan Brown, Madonna, Bill Gates, and The Donald.
10 posted on
12/02/2005 11:20:06 PM PST by
Oztrich Boy
( the Wedge Document ... offers a message of hope for Muslims - Mustafa Akyol)
To: Elsie; LiteKeeper; AndrewC; Havoc; bondserv; Right in Wisconsin; ohioWfan; Alamo-Girl; ...
11 posted on
12/03/2005 3:41:39 PM PST by
Michael_Michaelangelo
(The best theory is not ipso facto a good theory. Lots of links on my homepage...)
To: Michael_Michaelangelo
12 posted on
12/03/2005 4:12:16 PM PST by
Tribune7
To: All
Before anyone accuses anyone of deception with respect to Meyer. He does belong to "The Discovery Institute". Beyond that, he has the right to express his opinion.
24 posted on
12/03/2005 7:12:32 PM PST by
AndrewC
(Darwinian logic -- It is just-so if it is just-so)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson