Religions > Atheism > Commentary: Pondering the spiritual contradictions of intelligent design
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jason Spaceman" |
| Date: |
01 Jul 2005 11:50:15 AM |
| Object: |
Commentary: Pondering the spiritual contradictions of intelligent design |
From the article:
---------------------------------------
BY RON GROSSMAN
Chicago Tribune
(KRT) - Scientifically speaking, there's no great novelty to the theory of
intelligent design, the Bible Belt's latest alternative to Darwin.
The greatest of the medieval theologians, St. Thomas Aquinas, taught that
the order we see all around us proved God's existence. But intelligent
design does frame with renewed clarity a philosophical question that has
haunted humans ever since they developed a capacity for wonderment: Why
does evil exist?
If the universe is governed by a benevolent power - call it God or the
dialectic or Mother Nature or whatever - why are we tormented by disease,
famine, cruelty and war?
Intelligent design envisions a universe in which impeccable logic reigns.
Evolution is predicated on blind chance. Darwin reasoned that many a litter
or seedpod contains oddballs whose differences give them a leg up in coping
with their environment. They prevail over siblings, and from those myriad
small changes the infinite variety of living creatures evolve, from amoebas
to modern man.
Especially in this country, churchgoers can be troubled by that picture.
In England, Darwin's homeland, and in Europe, even the more conservative
denominations have long since made peace with evolution. But the idea that
apes and men have a common ancestry still troubles a broad swath of Middle
America, where people take a simple and straightforward piety to Sunday
services.
---------------------------------------
Read it at
http://www.grandforks.com/mld/grandforks/news/nation/12032564.htm
J. Spaceman
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Pondering the spiritual contradictions of intelligent design |
01 Jul 2005 01:33:51 PM |
|
|
Benevolence is a matter of opinion. All that ID says is that the
statistics don't stack up. It does not say we did not descend from apes
merely that we did not descend by the naive application of statistics.
If you worry about the religious inplications of ID there is always
Infinite Gynothropism. You lot talk about lines of daughters so this is
the correct word. IWe are moving at 600Km/s relative to 2.7K. Go to
where the recession is c/2 and we still have a speed of this order.
This is the [b]Cosmological Principle[/b]. For the CP to hold the
Universe must be infinite as no matter how far we go we never
apparently move. If it were not infinite there would be velocities of
c/2 at the edge.
.
|
|
|
| User: "josephus" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Pondering the spiritual contradictions of intelligentdesign |
02 Jul 2005 03:47:04 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Benevolence is a matter of opinion. All that ID says is that the
statistics don't stack up. It does not say we did not descend from apes
merely that we did not descend by the naive application of statistics.
If you worry about the religious inplications of ID there is always
Infinite Gynothropism. You lot talk about lines of daughters so this is
the correct word. IWe are moving at 600Km/s relative to 2.7K. Go to
where the recession is c/2 and we still have a speed of this order.
This is the [b]Cosmological Principle[/b]. For the CP to hold the
Universe must be infinite as no matter how far we go we never
apparently move. If it were not infinite there would be velocities of
c/2 at the edge.
What do you know about relativity? It says this is not true. the other
problem is there is no edge of the universe, just like there is no
center. the event horizon due to the speed of light says we will
never see that "edge", nor anything outside the event horizon. It says
the universe is finite but unbounded. There are no edges and time does
not have a beginning. the Cosmological Principle says the universe is
homogeneous and isotrophic.
josephus
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Pondering the spiritual contradictions of intelligentdesign |
02 Jul 2005 11:50:42 AM |
|
|
But for a piece of matter that happens to be travelling at c/2 relative
to another piece that is not true. Its horizon wwill be different. We
see a finite Universe at every point that is true, but our observing
frame does not the universe.
If we were to suddenly travel through a worhole (gedanken experiment)
to the c/2 point we would see a Universe of the same age as we do now.
Suppose we went further back still to 2.7K. Matter and radiation would
not be separating the Universe again would be its present age.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "rich hammett" |
|
| Title: Re: Commentary: Pondering the spiritual contradictions of intelligent design |
01 Jul 2005 04:06:52 PM |
|
|
In talk.origins sanoi, hitaasti kuin hämähäkki:
Benevolence is a matter of opinion.
If I don't think that something that happens to me is good, is the
doer benevolent?
All that ID says is that the
statistics don't stack up. It does not say we did not descend from apes
merely that we did not descend by the naive application of statistics.
However, the IDiots in Kansas and Pennsylvania deny the whole idea
of common descent. They even had young-earthers testifying in their
monkey court.
If you worry about the religious inplications of ID there is always
Infinite Gynothropism. You lot talk about lines of daughters so this is
the correct word. IWe are moving at 600Km/s relative to 2.7K. Go to
where the recession is c/2 and we still have a speed of this order.
This is the [b]Cosmological Principle[/b]. For the CP to hold the
Universe must be infinite as no matter how far we go we never
apparently move. If it were not infinite there would be velocities of
c/2 at the edge.
You are right!
rich
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
/ Estragon: People are bloody ignorant apes.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
