Skip to comments.Pro-Darwin consensus doesn't rule out intelligent design (published on CNN!!!)
Posted on 11/24/2009 6:50:51 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
Pro-Darwin consensus doesn't rule out intelligent design
(CNN) -- While we officially celebrate the 150th anniversary of the publication of Charles Darwin's "On the Origin of Species" on November 24, celebrations of Darwin's legacy have actually been building in intensity for several years. Darwin is not just an important 19th century scientific thinker. Increasingly, he is a cultural icon.
Darwin is the subject of adulation that teeters on the edge of hero worship, expressed in everything from scholarly seminars and lecture series to best-selling new atheist tracts like those by Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. The atheists claim that Darwin disproved once and for all the argument for intelligent design from nature.
And that of course is why he remains hugely controversial. A Zogby poll commissioned by the Discovery Institute this year found that 52 percent of Americans agree "the development of life was guided by intelligent design." Those who are not scientists may wonder if they have a right to entertain skepticism about Darwinian theory.
Read a leading Darwin proponent's view that evolution leaves no room for intelligent design theory...
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
For the record, this post is being posted in News/Activism by the express permission of Jim Robinson, founder and owner of Free Republic:
“Debate on church doctrine and or threads on specific religious matters may be best posted in the religion forum, but the defense of religious freedom, especially against those who wish to deprive us of same belongs front and center on FR.
They banned God and prayer and creationism from public schools and public places, but Ill be damned if theyre gonna ban Him or it from FR!”
Gee, I guess THAT means the Earth is only 6000 years old!
Frankly we are going to find super-computer capabilities somewhere in the coding of the DNA we ordinarily encounter on Earth. I'm pretty much of the belief that the universe is sufficiently "wired" that such things can spring, unbidden, and self-organize.
It's that level of design ~ the fundamental structure of the universe ~ that's most likely the place where we'll find the "tinkering".
(All of which are "self organizing" given the presence of heat).
You could never make one good enough to make a flea ..... much less a human.
That’s just my opinion.
I stopped right there. "Celebrate"?? I celebrate Christmas, Easter, Memorial Day, Independence Day and other major holidays. I have never "celebrated" Darwin in any way, shape or form.
Lemmie flip this a bit. Can you imagine a CNN reporter saying:
"While we officially celebrate the over 2000th birthday of Jesus Christ..."
Yeah. I thought so, too.
Debate on church doctrine and or threads on specific religious matters may be best posted in the religion forum, but the defense of religious freedom, especially against those who wish to deprive us of same belongs front and center on FR."
But, GGG, this is about ID, NOT about religion?
Check out the mouth-breathing half-wit at post #3!
ColdWater, please define "religion."
If the universe is *wired* then nothing is going to spring up unbidden and self-organize. The wiring would be what caused it.
Honestly, this business that evos have of denying a creator because it's based on faith and then expecting anyone to believe that the universe could self-organize with no intelligent impetus, is bizarre beyond belief.
It takes more faith to believe in those fantasy scenarios that have no rational or logical basis and no precedent than to believe that God did it, in whatever manner one chooses.
What is it with evos that they are so adamantly opposed to the concept of intelligence and design being behind the creation of the universe and the life in it?
You have never heard of the Darwin celebrations, such as Darwin Day? They hold observances all over the world. They even sing Christmas tunes to Darwinian evo-atheist words. It’s quite a sight to behold!
Notice how CW conveniently left out the very next sentence:
“They banned God and prayer and creationism from public schools and public places, but Ill be damned if theyre gonna ban Him or it from FR!
These kinds of deliberate misrepresentations are standard operating procedure for CW.
I’ve never heard of “Darwin Day.” But ewww...it sounds right up there with Fulsom St.!
Not really: in cosmology it's called "the anthropic principle". There are just too many 'coincidences' and fine-tuned constants in the laws of physics that are necessary for anything like life to arise. These point so strongly toward design at the fundamental level, that atheistic materialists have abandoned both Occam's Razor and the Popperian standard of falsifiability, and posited the "multiverse", an infinitude of other (necessarily unobservable, and therefore both unfalsifiable and unverifiable) universes so that ours can just happen to be one of the rare ones suitable for life, to avoid the conclusion that the universe in toto was designed to support life.
"My ways are not thy ways saith the Lord." Our way to make something complex is to design it by hand. It seems His was is to grow it.
Once you have a well-designed environment, yes, the Darwinian mechanism can give rise to novel complex structures. We've even mastered the trick for ourselves: inside a digital computer with software specifically made for the purpose, novel, useful, complex algorithms can be evolved by a Darwinian mechanism (Google "evolutionary algorithms"). Absent a well-designed environment, you don't even get self-reproducing systems of any sort, so Darwinism doesn't even have anything to apply itself to.
Perhaps someone can answer me these two questions. I am not trying to be sarcastic, but have never had these questions adequately answered and would like to know what a atheist evolutionist would think.
First, how could life begin from nothing? Please, I understand that some believe in a “primordial soup”...but that is misleading because initially there was no soup. Soup is organic, there would have only been inorganic materials from which to build life...how could that have possibly happened?
Second, if life were created from nothing...then why is not new life being created all the time now that there really is a very rich soup of life from which to draw on?
You totally ducked the question. Same ol’ GGG.