Evolution and intelligent design

[dleviwing]

Your information is helpful.

Your presentation is unbecoming and disrespectful to the author of this thread.

My observation has been that many who come to this forum do not linger.

I wonder why?

I could very easily go to the metaphysics and spiritual forums to voice my science but I don't; that would be discourteous to those who are active in those forums. When they come to the science forums and refuse to follow the rules I find that insulting and they DO NOT deserve any form of neither respect nor courteous response! Do you disagree?
Go to YouTube and view the videos by thunderf00t titled "Why we laugh at creationist".

[labelwench]

I could very easily go to the metaphysics and spiritual forums to voice my science but I don't; that would be discourteous to those who are active in those forums. When they come to the science forums and refuse to follow the rules I find that insulting and they DO NOT deserve any form of neither respect nor courteous response! Do you disagree?
Go to YouTube and view the videos by thunderf00t titled "Why we laugh at creationist".

I respect that all people have a right to their opinions.

Therefore, I respect your right to your opinion, and no more.

Farewell.

[Graybeard]

I will mention this to a moderator .... but finding a good one is hard ...

Dave, when the Dam has so many leaks ... which hole do you put your finger in ?

cool bananas ... greg

[SteveA]

Is it irony that "man" hopes to disprove creation by the evolution of various intelligent designs of our own? How intelligent is that?

That's an irony (or even paradox?) that I also noticed.

Here we are sitting around trying to figure out how everything works and after many (assumed) billions of man years of work we have some intricate pictures ... and they're still growing.

Pretty much wherever we search there's more detail to be constructed (?) there.

If we had some supercomputer executing a program more complex than all humanity put together could figure out ... wouldn't that border on something deserving the title of "intelligent"? If not, then how could anyone call themself intelligent?

I guess the real debate is over the term "design", but I'm rather certain that's in there too - if from the simple fact that our explorations of it are things of our own design (as you stated, Meem) and the discovered results are similarly the results of a dynamic creation, that might be somewhat haphazard, but not without a purpose.

Personally it appears inevitable that there exists a form of intelligent planning to things but specifically where/when/who/what/why etc. determines things is a good question and there might not be a specific answer as many things appear interrelated, so it could be better to search for answers in directions that more important as the specific whos/whats/wheres/whens/whys etc. in many ways don't matter (though it can be fun creating lots of possibilities in that respect).

Draw it however you think's best.

[Mohan.C]

Is it natural that man seeks his true nature or the natural? Maybe one can confuse their own nature for the natural. There are plenty of unseen things which the effects of are visable. One of the most profound is a thought.

The effect of a thought is action

[Mohan.C]

Perhaps I should restate that.

The arrogance lies in that both science and religion are seeking for the same thing, yet they disparage each other.

Hope would be better served if an alliance were made between the two, IMO.

Even though hope is intrinsic to both. One of them provides hope through fear. Another gives it through freedom.
Its their choosing.

life has it's own intrinsic value, which may or may not include the need to know it's own origin, depending on one's individual perception of the question.

It never has to be to know its origin. But, just to know. Knowledge is what drives humanity. It doesn't have to be knowledge of oneself or of god.

[Meem]

What is the idea behind field theory, and what causes said fields? I am not certain of which is the lesser of two evils, I am holier than thou, or I am smarter than thou. Perhaps there is no lesser of the two. I believe I said in the op, I find an irony in the fact that it is expected to uncover the origins of the universe by intelligent design. Is the lhc intelligent design? It doesn't matter though. The thread is dead.

Thank you label, but do not expend yourself on my account. I stuck my "toe" into the water and can withdraw it.

Master Yoda,

“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”

Perhaps, after the very first crash data is run through the pattern recognition, a monochrome display will read,

42.

[Mohan.C]

Is it irony that "man" hopes to disprove creation by the evolution of various intelligent designs of our own? How intelligent is that?

I don't think man is trying to disprove creation. He is just curious. Infact, if he can create an intelligent design of his own. The fact that he might himself be an Artificial design can only get stronger.

[Meem]

Mohan, from my perspective, evolution did not start on earth. If I am to accept evolution, the math of how many planets there should be capable of sustaining life before the earth was formed, is astronomical. If I am a product of evolution, it was a process that started when the universe began. Apparently, that is a hot button issue as well. Perhaps it always was, is, and will be? Science seems to refuse those thoughts as well. (life on other planets) All the fitting, it seems to be a fairly good reason to deny access to the heavens, if you think it's possible that they are watched over, by aliens or angels.

The day we shed our scientific and religous prejudice, perhaps the heavens will open up and welcome us home, so to speak.

There is no empirical evidence the universe began is there? So should I apply that it simply has always been?

I hope you have a good day. I believe I have worn my welcome.

[Graybeard]

Mohan, from my perspective, evolution did not start on earth. If I am to accept evolution, the math of how many planets there should be capable of sustaining life before the earth was formed, is astronomical. If I am a product of evolution, it was a process that started when the universe began.

Meem ...... You appear to be referring to Biological Evolution. Cosmic Evolution is the evolution of the Universe .... it is also ruled by Random Natural Selections ... Biological Evolution is only a small part .... so far as we know ... !

And by the way, you can't wear out your welcome in your own thread ..... and tho you have placed it in the Physics Forum, you have pre-fixed it 'Unified'.

cool bananas ... greg