Intelligent Design

[Tesla]

"ID THEORY MADE SIMPLE
The basic idea behind ID is that life and its component parts display something called “irreducible complexity.” This means that living systems (plants, animals, people) are so complicated that they could not possibly have arrived at their present forms through evolution – instead, new species must have been deliberately planned and introduced to the planet by some sort of godlike being.

Inanimate objects such as televisions, microwave ovens or wristwatches illustrate this principle. If we can admit that these devices show evidence of planning and design, and are unlikely to have emerged from chance alone, then shouldn’t we admit the same of the human eye? </SPAN>
Like the watch, the eye seems so perfectly engineered that it’s difficult to imagine how it could have evolved in stages over time. Remove any one of its parts, ID theorists point out, and it would dim, blur, or even become completely useless.</SPAN>
Unfortunately, there are a few problems with this line of reasoning, at least from the Biblical perspective. For one thing, if organs and species are so complex that they require an “intelligent designer,” then wouldn’t this “designer,” too, be at least as complex as its creations, and so require a designer of its own? And wouldn’t that intelligent designer also require a designer, and so too its designer, ad infinitum?..."

~Rev Max

---------------------------------------

There is no understanding when it comes to infinity, only acceptance. Damn, that's a hard stone to swallow.

-Tesla

PS This backs up my why post!

[mkirkpatrick]

Thanks Telsa,there is plenty of evidence to support this reality,you just
have to look around you.I have written several posts here on the forum
about the very same thing,so further thanks for the support of the theory.
kind regards michael.

[mkirkpatrick]

It seems that there is little support for this intelligent design thread,as onlymyself and
Tesla have posted on it!

Maybe new blood on the forum will breathe life into this forgotton thread?


regards michael.

[Despina]

An interesting theory I have not come to grips with, why? well to begin with it blows my mind with more questions, it deviates as far back as, well, from nothing. Kinda brings back the GOD thing.
Do we on our quest find it hard to accept chance? coincidence? and what of the imperfections in the so called 'design'? was they ment? Is my partial sight partial through intelligent design? I think not.

[mkirkpatrick]

An interesting theory I have not come to grips with, why? well to begin with it blows my mind with more questions, it deviates as far back as, well, from nothing. Kinda brings back the GOD thing.
Do we on our quest find it hard to accept chance? coincidence? and what of the imperfections in the so called 'design'? was they ment? Is my partial sight partial through intelligent design? I think not.

Then tell us what you really think then Despina?


regards michael.

[Despina]

As I said Michael I have not quite grapsed this theory
I would feel ignorant if I at least did not study/analize the reasoning behind it.
As for my own theory? I for ever search, learn and will post accordingly.

For now, Intelligent Deisgn does not sit with me comfortably.

May my genes spread far and wide to breath life on earth in my death

[Kenneth]

http://www.leestrobel.com/videos/Cre...robelT1004.htm

[mkirkpatrick]

http://www.leestrobel.com/videos/Cre...robelT1004.htm

Kenneth,would be also most grateful for your personal input as well as quotes
from the "good book"




regards michael.

[Kenneth]

I have no problem with evolution as in change over time. There is a process to everything. However when it is said by Darwinist that life has just evolved by natural means and is an undirected process I must disagree. Life evolving by natural means is a directed process. If it were not directed then there would be no process. God is intimately a part of the universe and thus when he does things it is very natural. When God does things that we don’t understand we call them miracles but when we do understand them it appears to be natural. As you become acquainted with him the supernatural becomes natural. How can they reduce the value of natural process by saying that it is “just natural processes” when the origin of them is completely unknown? For me the main thing that distinguishes the theory of intelligent design from the Darwinist theory of evolution is intelligence.

If all of the proteins and chemicals were in the right place for the cell to become alive; then why would nonliving matter start working as ONE for the survival of the cell as a whole? However if its own selfish desire for survival was its primary goal then why would it even care about reproduction unless its goal was for survival of life as a whole (ONE)?
Let’s say a cell “naturally” evolved. All cells have DNA to tell it how to reproduce, grow, and to perform all the necessary functions for life. How did this first cell know what to do without this intelligence? Because without this intelligence it could not live! And if you think it had DNA of some kind then where did this coded information come from?

How does a tree know that there is gravity to pull its seeds down to the fertile soil for reproduction?
How does a dandelion know that there is wind to carry its seeds?
How does a fruit tree know that there are animals and insects in the world to eat the fruit and spread its seeds? Perhaps there is a bigger picture here. Fruit trees were not made just for their own survival but for the survival of life as a whole.

[mkirkpatrick]

It does not require much intelligence to see the intelligence behind all existance,in many
ways it is self-evident if you look with eyes wide open.



regards michael.