Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Biological Information Confirms Creation?

  1. #1
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    581

    Biological Information Confirms Creation?

    I found some interesting videos on Youtube. I haven't watched it yet because it's late now and I'd like to know your opinions so I can have them as a reference when I'm watching. I'm an athiest, but am always open minded. Since there is always 2 sides, I'd like to know what absurdities are probably in here. Most of these videos are always one-sided towards theists.

    Biological Information Confirms Creation Part 1
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLP-d-TaRSk

    Biological Information Confirms Creation Part 2
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrcsoFtrWFM

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Be kind to yourself always. cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Posts
    30,264
    Just because there's nothing found to substantiate that somethings didn't evolve doesn't mean that one day we won't find those "missing links" that aren't now known. It is the same with the universe, until more information is known we can only theorize as to how the universe started but to assume a supernatural being created this entire structure would seem a very far fetched idea to say the least but there are always those who will "believe" in anything that seems to make sense even though no facts are presented to prove it to be true.

  3. #3
    Bunch of junk.

    Consider the source: Stephen Meyer, the guy responsible for the Intelligent Design movement; Douglas Axe, author of the article that serves as the basis for this--informercial, I guess?--for Intelligent Design, is the director of the Biologic Institute (mentioned in the videos), which is an arm of the Discovery Institute. Both of these institutions exist to forward the agenda of Intelligent Design (and Meyer, unsurprisingly, is a very important person at the Discovery Institute).

    Consider the science: The flaws in Axe's study can be found here, but what it boils down to is that he rigged the game, so to speak, to ensure he'd come out with a favorable result (hence the "wowza!" number in the video).

    Meyer's article, mentioned in the second video, got the editor of the journal, Richard Sternberg removed from his position because, as it turned out, Sternberg never actually submitted the article for peer-review, and simply published it at his own discretion. The reason Sternberg did this is because he is an IDer, as well as a fellow at the ISCID, a society that advances the junk theory of Intelligent Design. The paper was panned by every legitimate scientists that read it, and the journal--independent of Sternberg, of course--retracted it.

    The rest of the video is one ID trope after another, wholly unsubstantiated and based entirely on junk science. It is a disservice to science to even call it junk science, so I'll retract that, and instead say it is based on what is essentially religious doctrine--the fabricated, baseless articles written by hacks whose sole agenda is pushing Intelligent Design.

    Intelligent Design is utter garbage. All of their "theories" have been debunked, and all of their conclusions have been demonstrated to have been based on flawed technique. There's nothing here. All they are left with is conspiracy theories ("Mainstream science is out to get us!") and legislation.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by garbonzo View Post
    I found some interesting videos on Youtube. I haven't watched it yet because it's late now and I'd like to know your opinions so I can have them as a reference when I'm watching. I'm an athiest, but am always open minded. Since there is always 2 sides, I'd like to know what absurdities are probably in here. Most of these videos are always one-sided towards theists.

    Biological Information Confirms Creation Part 1
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLP-d-TaRSk

    Biological Information Confirms Creation Part 2
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrcsoFtrWFM

    Thanks.
    What you have just posted...is on the most insanly idiotic things i have ever viewed..at no point in their rambling, incoherent responses to the origins of life did they even touch anything that could be considered a rational though. everyone in this forum or even looks at those videos is now dumber for doing so . I award you no praise..and may your god have mercy on your soul
    Last edited by Saturnine Pariah; 02-14-12 at 05:12 PM.

  5. #5
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    3,690
    Quote Originally Posted by garbonzo View Post
    I found some interesting videos on Youtube. I haven't watched it yet because it's late now and I'd like to know your opinions so I can have them as a reference when I'm watching. I'm an athiest, but am always open minded. Since there is always 2 sides, I'd like to know what absurdities are probably in here. Most of these videos are always one-sided towards theists.

    Biological Information Confirms Creation Part 1
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLP-d-TaRSk

    Biological Information Confirms Creation Part 2
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrcsoFtrWFM

    Thanks.
    watched them both , interesting

    the thing is , if intelligent design

    why , evolution ?

    because despite intelligent design , evolution still matters

    Darwin's mistake was the idea of time , meaning that evolution was slow

    changes can take place very , very , very , quickely

    as I pointed out in the genetics and biology forum

    in California's silcon valley , autism is a problem

    because it is thought that both parents delve into thought or into themselves to much

  6. #6
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    3,690
    hence would intelligent design encourage autism ?

  7. #7
    No, thinking too much doesn't cause autism, quite the opposite, technical non-social people tend to be on the autistic spectrum and are drawn to high tech jobs, so their offspring also tend to have autism, sometimes more severe than their parents.

  8. #8
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    3,690
    Quote Originally Posted by spidergoat View Post
    No, thinking too much doesn't cause autism,
    agreed

    quite the opposite, technical non-social people tend to be on the autistic spectrum and are drawn to high tech jobs, so their offspring also tend to have autism, sometimes more severe than their parents.
    agreed

    in silicon valley it is the mathematical bright , brillant people who have this child autism problem

  9. #9
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    3,690
    yet to reiterate

    hence would intelligent design encourage autism ?

  10. #10
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    581
    Excellent posts, most noteably JDawg's thanks, guys. Continue on, if you have anything else to share, thanks.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Saturnine Pariah View Post
    What you have just posted...is on the most insanly idiotic things i have ever viewed..at no point in their rambling, incoherent responses to the origins of life did they even touch anything that could be considered a rational though. everyone in this forum or even looks at those videos is now dumber for doing so . I award you no praise..and may your god have mercy on your soul
    You obviously watched Billy Madison recently, and have been waiting for an opportunity to use that one.

    Was the experience everything you had hoped it would be?

  12. #12
    I was serious to a point,, i did watch both of the videos that he had posted...both were just creationism repackaged as intelligent design. i thought " might as well insult him" but i wanted to do it without anying " undersirable language" in these forums. i find that quote to fit anything that a stupid person says to me or says while i have the unfortunate chance to listen to it.

  13. #13
    You could learn more about the Intelligent design/Evolution Battle from a under-appreciated documantry " A Flock of DoDos"

  14. #14
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    581
    Quote Originally Posted by Saturnine Pariah View Post
    I was serious to a point,, i did watch both of the videos that he had posted...both were just creationism repackaged as intelligent design. i thought " might as well insult him" but i wanted to do it without anying " undersirable language" in these forums. i find that quote to fit anything that a stupid person says to me or says while i have the unfortunate chance to listen to it.
    You do realize that I'm an athiest who hasn't even seen the videos yet, right? I just wanted to see how bad they were before I watched, lol.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by garbonzo View Post
    You do realize that I'm an athiest who hasn't even seen the videos yet, right? I just wanted to see how bad they were before I watched, lol.
    That's rather lazy, don't you think?

  16. #16
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    581
    Quote Originally Posted by JDawg View Post
    That's rather lazy, don't you think?
    How so? I am still going to watch it. I just wanted to know if I should take it serious or not before I watched it. Being an ex-theist, and open minded, I am easily persuaded by theistic things that seem to have some foundation. At least I have come to learn to do research first, as most if not all have no foundation at all. I can see that the Bible is total bunk, but I am not 100% on if there is a creator or not. I am told most atheists aren't, so. Until I see any real evidence, I am an atheist.

    Also, this was sent to me by a friend and people on here like you have a lot more knowledge on this stuff than I will know in my life probably. I am lazy and this makes me a good creative writer and game designer, though. As they say there is a job for everyone. Haha.

    I love thinking, but I hate work, which is research, so go figure.

    I am going to send this to my friend now. Just think of it as enlightening another soul. Rofl.

Similar Threads

  1. By coberst in forum Human Science
    Last Post: 10-10-09, 07:16 AM
    Replies: 0
  2. By cyberdyno in forum General Philosophy
    Last Post: 06-01-08, 07:34 AM
    Replies: 2
  3. By Reiku in forum Physics & Math
    Last Post: 10-02-07, 11:55 AM
    Replies: 34
  4. By Reiku in forum Physics & Math
    Last Post: 09-17-07, 08:20 PM
    Replies: 0
  5. By Quantum Quack in forum Religion Archives
    Last Post: 08-25-07, 02:54 AM
    Replies: 1

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •