The ID group has so terrified Darwinists that they have battened down the hatches around fake science to ‘disprove’ the issue of design. Richard Dawkins with chattering teeth has pronounced natural selection the answer to design. But the issue of design never works as a proof for the existence of god, for a simple reason that the god idea is incoherent. And figures like Kant long ago exposed such logic. The problem appears step one with the term ‘intelligent’. Can we predicate design as ‘intelligent’ to conclude the existence of god? Can we call ‘god’ intelligent. Think carefully the idea is a trap.
Consider the absurdities latent in our terminologies with a slightly different example: If Gautama was enlightened isn’t an omnipotent ‘god’ enlightened? If buddhas then pass beyond existence, does god then pass beyond existence? The idea creates hopeless confusion and shows how only a primitive theism can ascribe personhood and consciousness to ‘god’. The same would be true of ‘intelligent’, no doubt. When we mix different and distinct terminologies the results are garbage in garbage…
In fact we no language or concepts to even discuss the question beyond the idiot level of Christian theology. And design arguments at that level fail at the start. But design in nature is a perfectly good concept and can be considered without theological implications. It suddenly becomes, if not fully coherent, then at least a question for science to explore.
I have heard ID dismissed as “apologetics,” with the implication of proponents in search of evidence to support a conclusion to which they’re pre-committed.
Source: Stephen Meyer: The Evidence “Cries Out” for God, Not the Other Way Around | Evolution News
It doesn’t sound as though they bothered with much evolution. How would we distinguish their origin from creation? At a certain point, does evolution become creation? Just wondering.
Source: World’s oldest scorpions show no change from 437 million years ago | Uncommon Descent
All kinds of babies are good at enticing grown-ups to care for them—including aliens from Star Wars.
Source: Humans Evolved to Love Baby Yoda – WSJ
Scientists don’t ask how some people evolved to be tall. In the same way, asking how homosexuality evolved is the wrong question. We need to ask how human sexuality evolved in all its forms.
Source: Homosexuality may have evolved for social, not sexual reasons
Important clues about the anatomy and evolution of the mysterious giant squid (Architeuthis dux) are revealed through publication of its full genome sequence.
Source: The mysterious, legendary giant squid’s genome is revealed — ScienceDaily
Evolution is so well established, says a Darwin lobbyist, that questioning it is like doubting that matter is made of atoms. Really?
Source: Michael Flannery on the Unraveling Darwinian Paradigm | Evolution News
Paleontologists in Alabama have announced the discovery of a new genus and species of fossil sea turtle that may fill an important gap in the evolution of sea turtles.
Source: New turtle genus and species that sheds light on the evolution of its modern relatives
Modern scientists have force-fed the theory of evolution on Americans for decades, leaving the impression it is settled science. But that is hardly the case, as many brilliant minds have criticized and questioned the theory, including David Berlinski, a self-described “secular Jew.”
Source: Evolutionary Theory Is a ‘Series of Folktales’: Renowned Academic Grills ‘Incoherent’ Modern Science | CBN News