Evolution v Creationism: A Dead Issue

[Jose Fly]

As someone who spent a lot of time on the evolution v creationism battles over the last 20 years, I've noticed that in the last 5 years or so the issue seems to have largely gone off the radar. In the message boards that are still around (both Christian and secular) it's barely debated, if at all. Websites specifically dedicated to countering creationist talking points such as talkorigins and pandasthumb have gone silent, seemingly because there just isn't much to talk about.

Surveys have shown that younger Americans accept the reality of evolution at pretty much the same rate as the rest of the developed world. Thanks to national focus on science education by organizations like the NCSE, evolution is more widely taught than ever, even in the deep south. The Discovery Institute (the main "intelligent design" organization) stopped advocating for ID creationism to be taught in schools years ago, and they closed their alleged "research arm" last year.

On the science front, creationism remains as it has for over a century....100% scientifically irrelevant.

So for all practical intents and purposes, this debate is over. There isn't any sort of public debate over teaching creationism, nor is there any real debate about whether evolution should be taught. For sure there's still work to do in some parts of the country (mostly the south and interior west) where even though evolution is officially required, teachers don't teach it either because it's "too controversial" or they don't believe it themselves, but big picture-wise, "evolution v creationism" is in about the same state as "spherical v flat earth"....nothing more than something a handful of people argue about on the internet, but outside of that has little to no significance. And even on that front it's kinda dead....most forums where it's openly debated have a very skewed ratio where there's like 10 "evolutionists" for every 1 creationist.

Glad to see it!

[brunumb]

[Replying to Difflugia in post #180]

Bottom line is that Creation Cosmology has a workable theory about ERVs and atheist cosmology does not. Those are the facts. You can try to spin the facts all you want but the facts are still the facts.

What on earth is Creation Cosmology? Could you please outline some of the salient points of the theory that specifically explains ERVs.

[brunumb]

So I do have an insight into what makes designed things different to undesigned things, of course its only an insight and I can't say its infallible, we know of no way to generate software without human minds being involved.

Please enlighten us on some of that insight by supplying the criteria you use to establish that an object has been designed rather than being not designed. How do you ultimately make your determination?

[Sherlock Holmes]

So I do have an insight into what makes designed things different to undesigned things, of course its only an insight and I can't say its infallible, we know of no way to generate software without human minds being involved.

Please enlighten us on some of that insight by supplying the criteria you use to establish that an object has been designed rather than being not designed. How do you ultimately make your determination?

We don't formally know or even know if there is an algorithm for this. That's one the research goals of ID.

[brunumb]

So I do have an insight into what makes designed things different to undesigned things, of course its only an insight and I can't say its infallible, we know of no way to generate software without human minds being involved.

Please enlighten us on some of that insight by supplying the criteria you use to establish that an object has been designed rather than being not designed. How do you ultimately make your determination?

We don't formally know or even know if there is an algorithm for this. That's one the research goals of ID.

So, after all this time the intelligent design proponents haven't even worked out how to definitively establish if something is designed or not. Too funny. Dead in the water alright.

[JoeyKnothead]

So, after all this time the intelligent design proponents haven't even worked out how to definitively establish if something is designed or not. Too funny. Dead in the water alright.

Hello 911, I hope y'all're okay, but I need to report me a murder. Killer's named brunumb. He's a good boy, he means well, and he couldn't help it, be he just killed that feller dead. There's witnesses and everything.

"It was designed."

"How can ya tell?"

"Well about that..."

[Sherlock Holmes]

So I do have an insight into what makes designed things different to undesigned things, of course its only an insight and I can't say its infallible, we know of no way to generate software without human minds being involved.

Please enlighten us on some of that insight by supplying the criteria you use to establish that an object has been designed rather than being not designed. How do you ultimately make your determination?

We don't formally know or even know if there is an algorithm for this. That's one the research goals of ID.

So, after all this time the intelligent design proponents haven't even worked out how to definitively establish if something is designed or not. Too funny. Dead in the water alright.

No, just as we can't define intelligence itself, its being researched, explored, its called scientific inquiry for a reason.

[Sherlock Holmes]

So, after all this time the intelligent design proponents haven't even worked out how to definitively establish if something is designed or not. Too funny. Dead in the water alright.

Hello 911, I hope y'all're okay, but I need to report me a murder. Killer's named brunumb. He's a good boy, he means well, and he couldn't help it, be he just killed that feller dead. There's witnesses and everything.

"It was designed."

"How can ya tell?"

"Well about that..."

Another riveting, thought provoking and insightful post.

[JoeyKnothead]

So, after all this time the intelligent design proponents haven't even worked out how to definitively establish if something is designed or not. Too funny. Dead in the water alright.

Hello 911, I hope y'all're okay, but I need to report me a murder. Killer's named brunumb. He's a good boy, he means well, and he couldn't help it, be he just killed that feller dead. There's witnesses and everything.

"It was designed."

"How can ya tell?"

"Well about that..."

Another riveting, thought provoking and insightful post.

Hello 911, I hope all y'all over yonders biscuits're buttered, and y'all ain't gonna believe this unless you're Christain, but that dead dude done hopped him back up, and went to posting on the internet.

And tell the cops my previous report was errant, but in good faithority.

[Jose Fly]

This is one of the ways you can tell ID creationism is just a belief (and not a well thought out one).

SH states in Post #185: "I regard the entire universe as being designed".

But then when asked about "the criteria you use to establish that an object has been designed rather than being not designed", SH replies in Post #193: "That's one the research goals of ID".

Like many creationists I've encountered, SH doesn't seem to have put his talking points together to see if they're consistent. If the entire universe is designed, then there are no "undesigned" things, which means "the research goal of ID" to differentiate between "designed" and "undesigned" things is pointless.

Oops.

[Sherlock Holmes]

This is one of the ways you can tell ID creationism is just a belief (and not a well thought out one).

SH states in Post #185: "I regard the entire universe as being designed".

But then when asked about "the criteria you use to establish that an object has been designed rather than being not designed", SH replies in Post #193: "That's one the research goals of ID".

Like many creationists I've encountered, SH doesn't seem to have put his talking points together to see if they're consistent. If the entire universe is designed, then there are no "undesigned" things, which means "the research goal of ID" to differentiate between "designed" and "undesigned" things is pointless.

Oops.

That's a fair comment, I did say each of those things, I'm happy to explore this and clarify if you'd like.