What does Intelligent Design prove?

[man]

What does Intelligent Design prove?

I must have asked that question a thousand times in various forms and comment sections and not one single person has ever said, It proves there is a god.

Why is that?

[theStudent]

Bacterial and viral infections have many things in common. Both types of infections are caused by microbes.
Both are pathogens that cause disease.

These pathogens, like all other life forms were created for a purpose.
From mosquitoes to flies, ants to beetles...

We do not know what purpose all life forms serve, but we know that bacteria play a very important beneficial purpose.
For example,
The New Encyclopdia Britannica

Although human interest in bacteria frequently focuses on their harmful effects, most bacteria are harmless to human beings, and many of them are actually beneficial.

They are of life-and-death importance.
Bacteria play a crucial role in the nitrogen cycle, as well as in cycles involving carbon dioxide and some elements.
We also need bacteria in our digestive tract. We have some 400 species in our lower intestinal tract alone, and they help to synthesize vitamin K and process wastes.
Of further benefit to us, bacteria help cows turn grasses into milk. Other bacteria are vital in fermentation " in our making cheese, yogurt, pickles, sauerkraut, and kimchi.

What, though, if bacteria get where they do not belong in our body?
Then up to two trillion white blood cells in our body fight the bacteria that might harm us.
Daniel E. Koshland, Jr., editor of Science magazine:

The immune system is designed to recognize foreign invaders. To do so it generates on the order of 1011 [100,000,000,000] different kinds of immunological receptors so that no matter what the shape or form of the foreign invader there will be some complementary receptor to recognize it and effect its elimination.

Similar alliances occur in the animal kingdom, especially with ruminants " animals that chew the cud " such as cattle, deer, and sheep. Their rumen, the first part of their multichambered stomach, hosts a veritable ecosystem of bacteria, funguses, and protozoa. By means of fermentation, these microbes break down cellulose, a fibrous carbohydrate found in vegetation, into various nutrients. Even certain insects that eat cellulose, including members of the beetle, roach, silverfish, termite, and wasp families, employ bacteria in the digestive process.

It is posible for as you can see that things can go wrong.
Things did go wrong when man decided that there was no need for an intelligent creator; when man decided that he probably was much wiser than God, and rejected his word.

Hence from that point things would only get worst, and man's unclean practices would result in pathogens getting way out of hand.

So while God indeed did create a perfect man and woman, with perfect brains and bodies, their actions - not obeying God, brought problems, includng diseases to them, and their offspring.

Again. God did not create flawed brains.

I hope that answers that apparently perplexing question.

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 36 by man]

Just to clarify ID and Intelligent Design are exactly the same thing.

I know.
That's why I said intelligent creator, so as to be more specific.

Let me ask you a different question, how can an Intelligent Creator be useful to us?

Is it because more people would believe in god and that would make the world a better place?

The fact that there is an intelligent creator, means that as the source of life, our spiritual, and physical well being would depend on him.

Right now, we get sick and die because our fore parents did not rely on the source of life. Hence, they deteriorated, and passed on their defective genes to their offspring.

For those who recognize that God is good - which is not most people - they have faith in his word of promise, that they (those who recognize God's goodness, and cling to him) can look forward to the future, with faith, and hope - where sickness, pain and death will be no more. (Revelation 21:3-5)

Not only do those who recognize his goodness, and cling to him, look forward to benefits in the future, but they benefit right now, from lives they consider to be meaningful, and filled with purpose.

Now, I will like to ask a few questions.

Would accepting the existence of a superhuman designer hamper scientific and intellectual progress?
Does it really make sense to infer from the design that there is a designer?

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 38 by Goat]

'argument from ignorance'

Argument from ignorance of what?
You didn't say. Rather, as usual, you just drop remarks.

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 39 by benchwarmer]

My Conclusion
Just this one piece of evidence (the brain) convinces me that B, intelligent design, has been demonstrated. Especially when I place it alongside other proven facts - A simple house requires a builder, how much more a complex brain requires, a master builder, a mathematical genius, if you will. Not blind chance.

[Donray]

[Replying to post 39 by benchwarmer]

My Conclusion
Just this one piece of evidence (the brain) convinces me that B, intelligent design, has been demonstrated. Especially when I place it alongside other proven facts - A simple house requires a builder, how much more a complex brain requires, a master builder, a mathematical genius, if you will. Not blind chance.

Again, all you did in explanation of why God created brains that go haywire is the old standby that Eve ate the fruit of knowledge. God wanted ignorant humans and that is why it got pissed when Eve wanted some knowledge. Everything was prefect before Eve sinned after that God just let things fall apart.

First off, you need to prove somehow that everything was perfect before Eve did a nasty thing and wanted knowledge. Bet you cannot.

You failed to address how viruses benefit man. I did not ask you about bacteria that you copy and pasted a lot of infor.

You have also failed to explain the perfect use of Black Holes.

You also failed to explain why you god credited a bad design in the human spin. It was meant for a four legged animal.

Could you also prove (since you know so much about perfection) why the human body is the mot prefect form.

You god did a bad job in designs for being intelligent design.

Explain why god limited brain size by limited the size of the birth canal.

You have not explanations except that Eve caused all the problems.

Could you tell what level of evolution do you believe in.

[man]

[Replying to post 36 by man]

Just to clarify ID and Intelligent Design are exactly the same thing.

I know.
That's why I said intelligent creator, so as to be more specific.

Let me ask you a different question, how can an Intelligent Creator be useful to us?

Is it because more people would believe in god and that would make the world a better place?

The fact that there is an intelligent creator, means that as the source of life, our spiritual, and physical well being would depend on him.

Right now, we get sick and die because our fore parents did not rely on the source of life. Hence, they deteriorated, and passed on their defective genes to their offspring.

For those who recognize that God is good - which is not most people - they have faith in his word of promise, that they (those who recognize God's goodness, and cling to him) can look forward to the future, with faith, and hope - where sickness, pain and death will be no more. (Revelation 21:3-5)

Not only do those who recognize his goodness, and cling to him, look forward to benefits in the future, but they benefit right now, from lives they consider to be meaningful, and filled with purpose.

Now, I will like to ask a few questions.

Would accepting the existence of a superhuman designer hamper scientific and intellectual progress?
Does it really make sense to infer from the design that there is a designer?

So the short version of your answer to the question, Is it because more people would believe in god and that would make the world a better place. is yes.

[Donray]

So the short version of your answer to the question, Is it because more people would believe in god and that would make the world a better place. is yes.

Please explain how Islam makes a better world to live in. After all, if there is a designer it most likely is Allah.

[man]

So the short version of your answer to the question, Is it because more people would believe in god and that would make the world a better place. is yes.

Please explain how Islam makes a better world to live in. After all, if there is a designer it most likely is Allah.

Just to be clear I do not support or have faith in any religion and for the most part I view all of them as doing more harm then good.

The only one I find even slightly agreeable is the religion of kindness, I think the Dalai Lama said that.

[theStudent]

Evolution
A process in which something passes by degrees to a different stage (especially a more advanced or mature stage)

That process can involve changes or adaptations of anything.
For example,
It can be a process of adaptation to environmental, or biological changes.
It can be a process of changes taking place naturally, or with effort - pupa, or lava, to adult; infant to adulthood; lacking knowledge to brilliant, skinny to six pack.

That's as far as I go where evolution is concerned.
If you're wondering about others, just list, and name them A-Z, and let me x them off.
Since, it possible I might have missed a few.


What's my view on science?
MISCONCEPTION: Science is a collection of facts.

Science is an exciting and dynamic process for discovering how the world works and building that knowledge into powerful and coherent frameworks.

Scientist make some amazing and mysterious discoveries.
What should they do with these findings?

1. Give credit to whomever, or whatever is out there that is responsible for these marvels, as many scientists of the past did, and moved on.
2. Use the knowledge to learn, how to care for the earth, and life on it.

The wonders of creation are like pages in a book, that can educate, and has educated scientists to make great contributions.
The order of the universe, for example, is a great contrast to the disorder on earth, even though there are some things that still maintain order.

In my opinion, beneficial science would be science that focuses on the problems at home - on earth.
Not the science that spends billions of dollars looking for E.T., and other universes.

What aee they going to do when, or if they find other galaxies?
Right now, in our own galaxy, they have not found life outside the earth.
So they found water on mars, so what?
Would digging up that planet in search of life prove beneficial, or damaging?

Astronomers say that the earth unlike any other planet is like a jewel in space, so it is obvious the scientists cannot be searching for advanced life forms to learn from.
What are they really searching for?
What would they accomplish by finding other galaxies?
How would that enhance their theories, or life on earth?

Wasting money, in my opinion.
Maybe they should spend more time exploring the human braain, and try to find out why so many have gone haywire - and see if they can fix them.

Scientist would only create more theories with the same, greater controversies than their current theories on evolution. What would they attribute their discoveries to? Another idea of course.
Why atribute the marvels of nature to a theory or idea, that does not make sense, and then try to establish that idea - unless the intention is to rid God and religion from the minds of people?

Why not read Charles Darwin views on God religion and religious belief to get the answer.

I remember being heartily laughed at by several of the officers (although themselves orthodox) for quoting the Bible as an unanswerable authority on some point of morality. I suppose it was the novelty of the argument that amused them. But I had gradually come by this time, i.e., 1836 to 1839, to see that the Old Testament from its manifestly false history of the world, with the Tower of Babel, the rainbow at sign, &c., &c., and from its attributing to God the feelings of a revengeful tyrant, was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindoos, or the beliefs of any barbarian. The question then continually rose, before my mind and would not be banished, is it credible that if God were now to make a revelation to the Hindoos, he would permit it to be connected with the belief in Vishnu, Siva, &c., as Christianity is connected with the Old Testament? This appeared to me utterly incredible.

By further reflecting that the clearest evidence would be requisite to make any sane man believe in the miracles by which Christianity is supported, (and that the more we know of the fixed laws of nature the more incredible do miracles become), that the men at that time were ignorant and credulous to a degree almost uncomprehensible by us, that the Gospels cannot be proved to have been written simultaneously with the events, that they differ in many important details, far too important, as it seemed to me, to be admitted as the usual inaccuracies of eyewitnesses; by such reflections as these, which I give not as having the least novelty or value, but as they influenced me, I gradually came to disbelieve in Christianity as a divine revelation. The fact that many false religions have spread over large portions of the earth like wild-fire had some weight with me. Beautiful as is the morality of the New Testament, it can be hardly denied that its perfection depends in part on the interpretation which we now put on metaphors and allegories.

But I found it more and more difficult, with free scope given to my imagination, to invent evidence which would suffice to convince me. Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted even for a single second that my conclusion was correct. I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my Father, Brother and almost all of my friends, will be everlastingly punished.

And this is a damnable doctrine.

This is just a small portion, of Darwin's confession, but you can read on.
I believe many on these forums have had, and even mentioned a similar experience to Darwin.
However,
Is it not clear what idea Darwin proposed as to the explanation of life, and why?
Is it not clear that God and religion were taken out of the picture, from the "giddy up", and why?

Religious views of Charles Darwin

Charles Darwin's views on religion have been the subject of much interest. His work which was pivotal in the development of modern biology and evolution theory played a prominent part in debates about religion and science at the time, then in the early 20th century became a focus of the creation-evolution controversy in the United States.

So false religion's misinterpretations of scriptures plyed a role in pushing him away from religion, and the Bible, and eventually God.
But my question is... If he knows this:

Beautiful as is the morality of the New Testament, it can be hardly denied that its perfection depends in part on the interpretation which we now put on metaphors and allegories.

Why allow himself to be pushed away?

My answer:
He wasn't pushed away. It was his choice to turn away.
The same doubt that was sown in Eve, and caused her fall, was sown in him. He proclaimed himself an agnostic.

Though reticent about his religious views, in 1879 he responded that he had never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a god, and that generally "an Agnostic would be the more correct description of my state of mind.

Others have become Atheist of other groups, but with similar experiences.
Anton LaVey

LaVey later claimed to have seen that many of the same men attended both the bawdy Saturday night shows and the tent revival meetings on Sunday mornings, which reinforced his increasingly cynical view of religion. In the foreword to the German language edition of The Satanic Bible, he cites this as the impetus to defy Christian religion as he knew it. He explains why church-goers employ double moral standards.[/b]

There is a long list of individuals who claim that religion played a role in their both rejecting and opposing it.
I think this is the main reason people are so committed to holding on to scientific theories that are not based on credible evidence.
In their minds, it presents the apealing message that there is no need for God, nor religion.

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 46 by man]

No.
It's a definite No.

Note

For those who recognize that God is good - which is not most people - they have faith in his word of promise, that they (those who recognize God's goodness, and cling to him) can look forward to the future, with faith, and hope - where sickness, pain and death will be no more. (Revelation 21:3-5)

Not only do those who recognize his goodness, and cling to him, look forward to benefits in the future, but they benefit right now, from lives they consider to be meaningful, and filled with purpose.

Which part do you find not too clear?