Posted on 02/22/2007 6:22:34 PM PST by Boxen
In a thought-provoking paper from the March issue of The Quarterly Review of Biology , Elliott Sober (University of Wisconsin) clearly discusses the problems with two standard criticisms of intelligent design: that it is unfalsifiable and that the many imperfect adaptations found in nature refute the hypothesis of intelligent design.
Biologists from Charles Darwin to Stephen Jay Gould have advanced this second type of argument. Stephen Jay Gould's well-known example of a trait of this type is the panda's thumb. If a truly intelligent designer were responsible for the panda, Gould argues, it would have provided a more useful tool than the stubby proto-thumb that pandas use to laboriously strip bamboo in order to eat it.
ID proponents have a ready reply to this objection. We do not know whether an intelligent designer intended for pandas to be able to efficiently strip bamboo. The "no designer worth his salt" argument assumes the designer would want pandas to have better eating implements, but the objection has no justification for this assumption. In addition, Sober points out, this criticism of ID also concedes that creationism is testable.
A second common criticism of ID is that it is untestable. To develop this point, scientists often turn to the philosopher Karl Popper's idea of falsifiability. According to Popper, a scientific statement must allow the possibility of an observation that would disprove it. For example, the statement "all swans are white" is falsifiable, since observing even one swan that isn't white would disprove it. Sober points out that this criterion entails that many ID statements are falsifiable; for example, the statement that an intelligent designer created the vertebrate eye entails that vertebrates have eyes, which is an observation.
This leads Sober to jettison the concept of falsifiability and to provide a different account of testability. "If ID is to be tested," he says, "it must be tested against one or more competing hypotheses." If the ID claim about the vertebrate eye is to be tested against the hypothesis that the vertebrate eye evolved by Darwinian processes, the question is whether there is an observation that can discriminate between the two. The observation that vertebrates have eyes cannot do this.
Sober also points out that criticism of a competing theory, such as evolution, is not in-and-of-itself a test of ID. Proponents of ID must construct a theory that makes its own predictions in order for the theory to be testable. To contend that evolutionary processes cannot produce "irreducibly complex" adaptations merely changes the subject, Sober argues.
"When scientific theories compete with each other, the usual pattern is that independently attested auxiliary propositions allow the theories to make predictions that disagree with each other," Sober writes. "No such auxiliary propositions allow … ID to do this." In developing this idea, Sober makes use of ideas that the French philosopher Pierre Duhem developed in connection with physical theories – theories usually do not, all by themselves, make testable predictions. Rather, they do so only when supplemented with auxiliary information. For example, the laws of optics do not, by themselves, predict when eclipses will occur; they do so when independently justified claims about the positions of the earth, moon, and sun are taken into account.
Similarly, ID claims make predictions when they are supplemented by auxiliary claims. The problem is that these auxiliary assumptions about the putative designer's goals and abilities are not independently justified. Surprisingly, this is a point that several ID proponents concede.
###
Sober, Elliott. "What is Wrong with Intelligent Design," The Quarterly Review of Biology: March 2007.
Since 1926, The Quarterly Review of Biology has been dedicated to providing insightful historical, philosophical, and technical treatments of important biological topics.
The intensity of the magnetic field is approximately 1400 years, the magnitude is approximately 700 years, with approximately 150 years of study of this phenomena we know between 10 to 20 percent about the field.?
Hers a few more propaganda sites for any lurkers, why dont you just come out and be honest and say for any of you out there that I can propagandise, here some sites for you. That would at least be honest as to where you are coming from.
Study with honesty and you will see for your self!
Doesnt make a bit of difference, it shows clearly that there is a questioning in once believed constants! And I can show you many, many more articles and evidential research. So catch up coyoteman. Peace!
Your propaganda makes me laugh! Christians are not against science, as a matter of fact they are the Honest ones who are showing all of the evidence, they are scientists. Just like the guy who invented the MRI machine and they gave the gibberish award to his evolutionist aids instead of him who he was the inventor, but he is a Christian. So it sghows more disengenuousness from evolutionist and there media buddies and university clicks. What dishonesty. Anyone can look it up for them selves just be honest with yourself and look at ALL the evidence and you will soon see evolution is pure absolute garbage
You arent fooling anyone coyoteman, Thos are pure ly proven articles that have nothing to do with creationist websites, they are just articles written by those who have done the research, from the research resoueces wich I have listed, anyone can look them up for them selves.
First of all!!!!! 2300 years bc is not the date of the flood!
It is 4500 years BC.
The last ten thousand years isnt known whatsoever there is absolutely no bonafied evidence of civilisation or anything of civilisations beyond a few thousand years ago, the pyramids are a few thousand years ago the babylonians are a few thousand years ago Ur of the Chaldes a few thousand years ago ancient citys etc... etc... and nothing beyond it of any visual evidence anyhting else is just story telling. There isnt found anything above the ground or under it that its bonafied evidence beyond a few thousand years ago this fact! All citys of the ancient only date back a few thousand years ago, and thats all there is. This is archeological fact!
Soils tell the story? you got that right, only you got to look at all the evidence.
It is known fact that mathmaticaly man could not have been on the earth for much more than the ascribed timeline of the bible, or populations would be far from what they are today, this is also known MATHMATICAL fact! And even when they have calculated theses formulas it goes backwards to man only being on the earth for around six thousand years what a coinsidence, to the timline of the bible and all ancient civilisations.
Show me one monumental piece of evidence of a note worthy civilisation beyond the Baylonians, Egyptians, The Hebrews and all other ancient lands and citys. I didnt think so! There is no absolute evidence what so ever, of any civilisations older than what we find which all date back only a few thousand years ago, this is archeological and historical fact!
City of Ur falls----2,004 BC
earliest forms of writing cuneiform --- c. 3,200 BC
First zigurats built by Ur Nammu c.2112-2095 BC
And on and on!!!
What are you - a fortune cookie?
Ok thats funny! Peace friend!
A wise man said: Trust, but verify.
I've to say that I don't even trust your claims - and I doubt that they can be verified:
You know I havent said any of these things, without any evidence to back them! If you need the evidence and you are honest you would look them up for yourself! but you dont you refuse, that says something about your wanting or lack of wanting to know the truth.
So, where is this evidence?
If you need the evidence and you are honest you would look them up for yourself!
You must be kidding! You make claims - and I should search for the evidence to back them up? Sorry, buddy, that's not the way it works...
but you dont you refuse, that says something about your wanting or lack of wanting to know the truth.
I'm afraid that your refusal to bring up evidence for your statements is saying "something about your wanting or lack of wanting to know the truth."
FWIW, if you make astonishing claims at this forum, you should be willing and able to give some corroborating evidence.
It is understood that the flood was around 4,300-4,500 years BC whenyou look at the geneology to Noah, there recorded in the bible and also recorded 1,000s of years later in the new testement. It is commonly understood that the flood did not take place 2,300 years BC but was more like 4,300-4,500 BC. Not even gonna waste my time with that one.
Dr. Raymond V. Damadian was shunned and not accredited for his work. PERIOD! He even took out a paid ad explaning his injustice and letting the public know because he couldnt rely on the mainstream media, this is fact.
If a generation passes every 25 years then that would mean 4,000 generations in 100,000 years do the math! were talking ridiculous! also much more could be said havent got the space/time, look for yourself if you are truly looking for the truth!
The evidence to the finds of sodom and gomorah have been known, the five cities of the plains they are located near the dead sea, they have found zigurat stands ashen ruins in gomorah the cities are covered with ash and pellets that are called brimstone and are nearly sulfur the pellets found are 96 -98% pure sulfur and there is no geo thermal activity anywhere in the area and these pellets are burened on the out shell and imbedded in the area. They found building structures etc... the structures there are composed of calcium sulfate and calcium carbonate which are by products of sulfur and limestone burning. the evidence is remarkable, look it up! very interesting! They have pictures of the city structures and the pellets and ash and burnt sulfur and limestone. very remarkable. they even checked with archeologists around the world and nowhere has it ever been found a composite of such sulfur pellets as these.
skeletal reconstructuring has been found fraudilent among evolutionists, skelotal supposed finds and later found hoaxes by evolutionists, thats several examples there, the fraudulent drawings of embryos, Earnst Haeckeal, the countless propaganda lies about vestigial organs proposed to class rooms, that have been so many cant even list them. The very fact that ALL eveidence isnt shown is a hoax and fraudulent on the behalf of evolutionists. etc...etc...
Peopl lived healthier lives in the past it is a moral evidential fact. The prisons are fuller today, we are a culture of death, the country was less divided, integrity was held in higher regard Im mean it isnt even worth arguing it with you everyone with any common sense knows that the world was more moral in general, not saying there werent moments in time, but the results were evident, that were there is immorality there is danger, just go to any unethical place today and you will be at greater risk of some immoral action taken on you. well these evidences and consequences were at much lower statistics than they are today this is a commonsensical fact and known to any honest seeker. Look up the statistics and the articles. Any honest person would.
Natural disasters tend to harm the rightful and the wicked the same? Is that a factual statement or your oppinion. Im just saying look at disasterous places and look at there lifestyles it makes you wonder, thats all.
So, Bishop Usher's genealogy has been recalculated. By whom? And who commonly understands It?
It was written in an ad? Then it must be true!
If a generation passes every 25 years then that would mean 4,000 generations in 100,000 years do the math! were talking ridiculous! also much more could be said havent got the space/time, look for yourself if you are truly looking for the truth!
A generation of mayflies passes every four days - we should be drowned in mayflies! Yes, I do the math, all day long.
The evidence to the finds of sodom and gomorah have been known, the five cities of the plains they are located near the dead sea, they have found zigurat stands ashen ruins in gomorah the cities are covered with ash and pellets that are called brimstone and are nearly sulfur the pellets found are 96 -98% pure sulfur and there is no geo thermal activity anywhere in the area and these pellets are burened on the out shell and imbedded in the area. They found building structures etc... the structures there are composed of calcium sulfate and calcium carbonate which are by products of sulfur and limestone burning. the evidence is remarkable, look it up! very interesting! They have pictures of the city structures and the pellets and ash and burnt sulfur and limestone. very remarkable. they even checked with archeologists around the world and nowhere has it ever been found a composite of such sulfur pellets as these.
A link, just one tiny link, please!
skeletal reconstructuring has been found fraudilent among evolutionists, skelotal supposed finds and later found hoaxes by evolutionists, thats several examples there, the fraudulent drawings of embryos, Earnst Haeckeal, the countless propaganda lies about vestigial organs proposed to class rooms, that have been so many cant even list them. The very fact that ALL eveidence isnt shown is a hoax and fraudulent on the behalf of evolutionists. etc...etc...
Who is Earnst Haeckeal? Do you refer to Ernst Haeckel? No substance in this paragraph....
Peopl lived healthier lives in the past it is a moral evidential fact. The prisons are fuller today, we are a culture of death, the country was less divided, integrity was held in higher regard Im mean it isnt even worth arguing it with you everyone with any common sense knows that the world was more moral in general, not saying there werent moments in time, but the results were evident, that were there is immorality there is danger, just go to any unethical place today and you will be at greater risk of some immoral action taken on you. well these evidences and consequences were at much lower statistics than they are today this is a commonsensical fact and known to any honest seeker. Look up the statistics and the articles. Any honest person would.
Reminds me of Sokrates' complaints about the youth of his time....
Natural disasters tend to harm the rightful and the wicked the same? Is that a factual statement or your oppinion. Im just saying look at disasterous places and look at there lifestyles it makes you wonder, thats all.
That was just my opinion. But you should instigate a investigation to predict earthquakes by the number of brothels in a certain area! I smell heavy funding for this project!
As with the son, so with the father. GOD was crucified in much the same way as Jesus was. Does this ring a bell with you?
You should. There is no agreement even among creationists on the date of the supposed flood:
2252 BC -- layevangelism.comBut none of this matters, as science has found no evidence that a global flood actually occurred.2304 BC -- Answers in Genesis (+/- 11 years).
2350 BC -- Morris, H. Biblical Creationism. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1993.
2370 BC -- TalkOrigins.com
2500 BC -- http://www.nwcreation.net/biblechrono.html
2978-3128 BC -- http://www.asa3.org/archive/ASA/199605/0162.html
3300 BC -- http://www.biblediscoveries.com/flood1.html
3537 BC -- Setterfield (1999)
The flood is mostly regarded as being around 4300-4500 BC dont care what other sites you put up there if it is looked at biblicaly and archeaologists and historians who have studied and scholars agree that the over all date is around 4300-4500 BC, there is always gonna be someone with some adhock to throw in there but the best evidence is and mostly regarded date is 4300 -4500 BC. And to add the evidence is overwhelming to a global flood.
OK. Your overwhelming evidence convinced me.
You can have your imaginary flood at any time you want.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.