rawad_m Posted October 21, 2005 Report Share Posted October 21, 2005 If there going to put out logical arguments for it, like Maxfly was doing, then I'd be all for it being discussed, but it has to be substantive arguments not just this is not explainable presently therefore god exists.. The traditional arguments for the existence of God/creator figure is more based on "first cause" and other logic arguments, while scientific theory's based mainly on empirical measures the non-falsifiable hypothesis, i.e. somethings only scientific if it can be disproven..some scientists believe that intelligent cause is "non-falsifiable" and therefore unscientific, yet the intellgent design proponents are arguing otherwise, that it is testible and falsifiable..who do you believe? Personally I think that the life is too complex argument being put forward is scientific and skeptics would be able to prove otherwise if they are correct. I read recently that for life to have come about somehow the right chemicals would have had to come together in the right quantities, under the right pressure and other controlling factors, and all this would have had to be maintained for the exact length of time, and repeated thousands of times for life to have come about, which is mathematically impossible-thats what the theory states In my opinion scientists and others who dismiss intelligent design as a theory should not be scared of it and say it's non scientific but attempt to show that this is not the case, that such complexity can be attributed to evolution and other means..:stickpoke: :rofl: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.