Global Warming...the Movie
POSTED BY: Hero
UPDATED: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 19:58
VIEWED: 9891
PAGE 9 of 12
Quote:Go to your own link in Wikipedia and scroll down to "Origins of the Concept." Note that Charles Darwin himself apparently used that term.
Originally posted by citizen:
Yeah, ID's been around nearly as long as evolution, give or take a century or so:
The exact term "intelligent design" was popularized recently, but the CONCEPT has been around for a long time.
All I am asking is that you make a distinction between the "intelligent design movement" and the concept of "complex systems imply a designer." You can support the latter without the former. I listed my husband, not as an appeal to authority, but as an example of a scientist who does.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:First, I cited GW as an example of inference of the FUTURE, not of the past. (Evolution past, GW future, get it?) Secondly, how do you know GW is occurring now, without putting it in context of assumptions about the distant past?
Originally posted by citizen:
Beyond that, you seem to be quite confused with your examples. Global Warming is occurring now, not in the past and is still controversial.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Citizen- You want to show you're not a Troll, do it there. At the moment all I see is a poster who spouts anti-science pseudo Christian Zealotry, on a the forum of a fan site for a Science-Fiction show they've never watched. Which sure as hell sounds like trolling to me.
i guess that makes me a troll.. boo hoo, big deal. luckily, the internet is a free forum, and i can visit whatever sites i choose. shame on me, for not seeing the show before i stumbled on to the site: dismiss everything i say now, out of hand- ive been discredited! im not anti-science, im just not an atheist. just maybe, philosophy and science arent completely distinct studies, but interrelated. how can someone focus all their attention on decoding nature, like picking apart DNA.. and not consider what encoded it? it seems like a pretty major oversight to me.. to relegate everything to mathematical randomness and chance. "chance", is just another way of saying you dont know what happened... so it sounds like theres still a lot to learn about the universe. for that reason, i reserve my judgement
but nevermind that.. you never answered my question: what is your solution to global warming?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Citizen- He has, before now, blamed science for everything from wars to eugenics (funny how that changes to individuals when it's turned back on him). Intelligent Design at it's very core is an attack on science, AM is a constant proponent of ID (he tries to shoehorn it in everywhere...), how much more anti-science do you need?
im not anti-science. im opposed to science as a religion
Quote:
He even tries to portray the very heart of science, inclusion of new evidence and ideas, as a very bad, even evil thing, Q.E.D.
evil? evil presupposes moral absolutes, which wouldnt exist absent a transcendent moral law giver. if we're just animals, explain how you define good and evil? as much as you resent my religion, you cant even separate the theology from your everyday language
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Still sounds exactly like deity ID, “there's an intelligence there because, because, well, there just has to be, doesn't there”. What's the intelligence? Where's it coming from? How's it generated? It still all sounds exactly like some magical and rather unnecessary disembodied god like intelligence, just like standard ID to me.
Originally posted by canttakesky:
That would be a crude oversimplification, but for the sake of argument...something like that. There is increasing evidence to suggest that adaptive genetic changes are a lot more complex and purposeful (intelligent?) than the random mutations in conventional evolutionary theory. I prefer to think of my husband's sympathies as "intelligent selection" rather than "intelligent design." But design is a distinct possibility, even when no deity is involved in the hypothesis.
Nothing you've provided indicates an Intelligent designer to me, not unless you're already looking for it.
Quote:I'd say the assumption of intelligence when there are simpler and better supported explanations brings it in to question though.
Of course not. However, nothing in the hypotheses above render them outside of the purview of science. Scientific investigation of the above phenomena and anomalies that challenge natural selection dogma is being done as we speak.
Quote:I really don't care. I'm talking specifically about Intelligent Design, which is a specific thing wrapped up in the Intelligent design Movement. You're the one shoe horning "complex systems imply a designer", not me. I'm talking specifically about the religious philosophy dressed up as a science for the purpose of undermining evolution, and nothing outside of that. I'm talking about the thing that first started in the late 1980's, not the very first germination of the idea. The pseudo-science religious "theory" called "Intelligent Design", that was created in 1987 is what I'm talking about, and nothing else.
The exact term "intelligent design" was popularized recently, but the CONCEPT has been around for a long time. All I am asking is that you make a distinction between the "intelligent design movement" and the concept of "complex systems imply a designer." You can support the latter without the former.
Quote:Yeah, that is an appeal to authority. A scientist approving of ID doesn't prove a thing about ID, least of all it being science.
I listed my husband, not as an appeal to authority, but as an example of a scientist who does.
Quote:That wasn't at all clear no. You mentioned them in the same breath with no clarification.
First, I cited GW as an example of inference of the FUTURE, not of the past. (Evolution past, GW future, get it?) Secondly, how do you know GW is occurring now, without putting it in context of assumptions about the distant past?
Saying it's impossible to predict the future with science is just plain silly. Physics does just that, and it's done everyday and all the time.
We don't need to make any assumptions about the distant past to know the Earth is warming, because we've collected empirical data over several years that show a warming trend.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
KWIKO
Quote:The difference between a lie and an illustration is whether or not it is based on fact. That would seem to be a simple concept - no ?
Kind of like when George W. Bush lied - er, I mean "illustrated" - about Saddam having WMD, even down to inventing and doctoring photos to "prove" his point. Oh - I mean "illustrate" his point, as in, "this is what it would look like IF Saddam had WMD."
In this case, it is a FACT that glaciers are in retreat all around the globe, and the ones that contact water retreat by calving. DUH.
Now, since Bush never let on that they just thought there might possibly be WMDS - poor Colin Powell went before the UN saying they were there, damn it ! - he did, er, lie.
***************************************************************
Oh, and thanks for proving my opinion that this is all about a lame attempt at childish payback for those non-existant WMDs. Instead of pouting, it would be more helpful - to you - to perhaps learn from your mistakes, like for example, the mistake of sticking to a silly talking point instead of learning the facts.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I sent you a PM, offering to work out our differences peacefully, instead you come back here and in a quite trollish and unchristian manner attempt to reignite a flame war. Yeah, your a really parable of Christian values you, ain't ya.
Quote:Yes you have. You're a troll. You haven't watched the show that this is a fan site for, so what are you doing here except to troll and sow discord? You've come to a Science-Fiction site, where you're likely to find mostly scientifically minded people, and then taken upon yourself to tell us all how evil science is and how anyone who doesn't repent and join your narrow definition of Christianity is evil. You're like an al Qaeda terrorist without the bombs. Actually, I wouldn't put it past you to use bombs...
Originally posted by antimason:
luckily, the internet is a free forum, and i can visit whatever sites i choose. shame on me, for not seeing the show before i stumbled on to the site: dismiss everything i say now, out of hand- ive been discredited!
As I said, I wouldn't go on to a bible site and tell everyone Christians are inherently evil and must be stopped, but then I have an ounce of morality, and I'm not after forcing everyone to live the life I want them to live, unlike you.
Quote:Yet you try to force a religion in to science. You're as anti-science as anti-science gets.
im not anti-science. im opposed to science as a religion
Quote:Are you obtuse or just plain stupid? I was saying YOU were calling it evil, not me.
evil? evil presupposes moral absolutes, which wouldnt exist absent a transcendent moral law giver. if we're just animals, explain how you define good and evil? as much as you resent my religion, you cant even separate the theology from your everyday language
But you've answered my question, you're not a Christian (I especially enjoyed you telling me not to judge, while starting that very sentence by judging me), and certainly not a good one. You're a troll and worthy of no further involvement.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You never answered my question, When did science do a complete U-Turn?
Originally posted by antimason:
but nevermind that.. you never answered my question: what is your solution to global warming?
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
you couldnt answer the question: define evil? you cant. there is no evil, isnt that your world view? i defy you to determine how morality is decided
and what preceded the big bang? even you have to admit that we dont know the 'cause'. at this point, there is no science. all you know, or believe, is that time + chance, created everything we see in front of us.
well I disagree. theres not enough time in eternity to produce the abundance of complexity we see in front of us. skepticism in this regard doesnt make me ignorant, or anti-science, that makes me an individual, with a mind that is capable of thinking independently. slander me all you like, you dont have all the answers either
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It wasn't a question aimed at me. I wasn't using the term, I was saying you were. I realise such a simple concept is beyond your closed off extremist mind's ability to grasp.
You're a Troll. You've slandered me (actually it's Libel here, but never mind), you preside in judgement over anyone and anything not of your very narrow definition of Christianity, then presume to tell others to "judge not". The most important one for you would be "let he who is without sin cast the first stone", because without sin sure doesn't include you.
Thank god most Christians are nothing like you.
You don't think for yourself, you just parrot what some extremist tells you to think, I've never pretended to have all the answers, you have, that is your lie. In fact your post, like the most of them, is nothing but a stream of lies. You don't know what I think or believe, but presume to judge me on what you want me to be. I don't know where to begin with pointing out the lack of basic Christian precepts in that.
You are anti-Science, a statement like "there is no science" does more to prove that than anything I've ever said. You are no Christian, you are the most immoral person I have ever met either on-line, or anywhere else. I take solace only in the fact that you are most likely some trollers construct, and not a real human being.
"i guess that makes me a troll.." AntiMason
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME