Evolution And I.d. Evidence Arguments (creation, God)

[Feathers in Hair]

*grabs a soda, more popcorn, and sits in a lawnchair nearby, head looking back and forth as if she's watching a tennis match*

Seriously, though, Vash, you may also want to consider changing your avatar and quote. Vash the Stampede sees no reason to join in a debate it may be impossible to prove.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by Steve

"When there are only two possible explanations, evidence against one is evidence for the other." Why should i abandon that logic if its reasonable? … That is logical and reasonable.

If thats all you can offer as why that statement isnt logical then why comment on it at all?

Originally Posted by The Voice of Reason

…"Just because your mind cannot conceive of any other possibility does not preclude them."

Im curious, pointing out that you yourself use the very arguments that you accuse me of, how does that make you look good? you condemn a type of argument and then end up using that exact type of argument.

Originally Posted by Steve

And like Vash pointed out Design Detection is a valid science.

Have you ever seen anything at all and been convinced that designed/inteligence must have been involved for it to be the way it is, without knowing who, seeing who, or knowing how? If you could take a car back in time 3000 years, i bet the people would conclude that it was designed with inteligence. The people wouldnt know who or how but they being rational would still know there was a who even though they couldnt explain it all. Ive said it befor and ill say it again, if i showed you a building would you conclude there was a builder even if i never showed you the builder? I think you would detect that there is design so there must have been a designer. Call it what ever type of science you want but it can still be used to arrive at valid conclusions.

Originally Posted by The Voice of Reason

You took about half a page to build a hypothetical situation around the SETI project, to bolster your position on ID. Only one minor technicality – you based your entire hypothetical situation on the argument that SETI had produced EVIDENCE. Just in case you haven't read the foregoing 10 pages of this thread – virtually everyone on here is asking you to provide EVIDENCE. Lacking that, your hypothetical situation damns your own position. Why am I not surprised?

My point was that Seti is based on Design Detection! and also that if they did detect evidence then they could draw a logical conclusion that there is Inteligence out there. We here on earth are surrounded by the very type of evidence that the Seti scientists are looking for, so much of what we see appears very Designed, isnt that evidence to support that there is a designer and if not explain why? If the many scientist that are using the SETI project to look for ETI just applied their same logic to what we see on earth they would have an abundance of the very type of evidence they are looking for!

Oh and just out of interest, if the SETI project today did pick up a whole 5 minites worth of "alien" music from another planet in another galaxy. What would you conclude? Would it be fair to say that there must be ETI? and if so you do agree that Design Detect is valid for this type of topic.

[Pah]

Originally Posted by Steve

...
My point was that Seti is based on Design Detection! and also that if they did detect evidence then they could draw a logical conclusion that there is Inteligence out there. We here on earth are surrounded by the very type of evidence that the Seti scientists are looking for, so much of what we see appears very Designed, isnt that evidence to support that there is a designer and if not explain why? If the many scientist that are using the SETI project to look for ETI just applied their same logic to what we see on earth they would have an abundance of the very type of evidence they are looking for!

Oh and just out of interest, if the SETI project today did pick up a whole 5 minites worth of "alien" music from another planet in another galaxy. What would you conclude? Would it be fair to say that there must be ETI? and if so you do agree that Design Detect is valid for this type of topic.

Are you familar with the "WOW" signal.?

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Steve

Oh and just out of interest, if the SETI project today did pick up a whole 5 minites worth of "alien" music from another planet in another galaxy. What would you conclude?

Classical, Blue Grass, or Heavy Metal?

Originally Posted by Steve

.. and if so you do agree that Design Detect is valid for this type of topic.

What topic - creation or music appreciation? The observation that Homo sapiens create music is hardly a coherent argument against descent with modification.

Perhaps you could help out your friend Vash and apply your 'theory' to our friendly Dolphin.

[The Voice of Reason]

Originally Posted by Steve

If thats all you can offer as why that statement isnt logical then why comment on it at all?

I should ask the same question about your incessant claims, without evidence. I thought you might appreciate the succinct reply, since the ones with a lot of words seem to be beyond comprehension.

Originally Posted by Steve

Im curious, pointing out that you yourself use the very arguments that you accuse me of, how does that make you look good? you condemn a type of argument and then end up using that exact type of argument.

Okay, I'll try to explain this, but I have my doubts about whether you really care. You are committing the fallacy of the Argument from Ignorance every time you claim that evidence against Evolution is equivalent to evidence FOR ID. Whether you grasp that or not is immaterial - it is still so. When you charge me with committing the fallacy, you are misapplying the fallacy to my argument. This happens because you either did not actually read the clip from Wikipedia, or, if you read, you did not digest it. It is not that I am incapable of committing that (or any other) logical fallacy when presenting my side of an issue, but, unfortunately for you, I will not point out my mistakes - you'll have to find them yourself. That's gonna be a tall moutain to climb, with no climbing gear, and no oxygen bottles.

Originally Posted by Steve

Have you ever seen anything at all and been convinced that designed/inteligence must have been involved for it to be the way it is, without knowing who, seeing who, or knowing how? If you could take a car back in time 3000 years, i bet the people would conclude that it was designed with inteligence. The people wouldnt know who or how but they being rational would still know there was a who even though they couldnt explain it all. Ive said it befor and ill say it again, if i showed you a building would you conclude there was a builder even if i never showed you the builder? I think you would detect that there is design so there must have been a designer.

You need to familiarize yourself with Paley's "Watchmaker" argument for ID, the variation the Dembski espouses (the "Lute"), and then read a rebuttal of either. They have both been shown to be fallacious, but unless you understand logic, you will miss the point.

Originally Posted by Steve

Call it what ever type of science you want but it can still be used to arrive at valid conclusions.

This is like boxing with someone that is unconscious. "Pseudo" is a prefix that means "false" or "spurious". The National Academy of Science is saying that ID is a "False" science - that is, they are saying that ID is not a science at all. And no, it (a false premise) cannot be used to arrive at valid conclusions, unless it is by sheer coincidence. Again, logic rears it's ugly head, revealing that you have misstated your position.

Originally Posted by Steve

My point was that Seti is based on Design Detection! and also that if they did detect evidence then they could draw a logical conclusion that there is Inteligence out there.

You are absolutely correct! IF they did detect evidence. See how that "Evidence" thing works? When evidence is present, we can make determinations about the validity of a hypothesis. When evidence is not present (as in the case of ID), we can only guess. Did you see that? No slight of hand - just plain old logic.

Originally Posted by Steve

Oh and just out of interest, if the SETI project today did pick up a whole 5 minites worth of "alien" music from another planet in another galaxy. What would you conclude? Would it be fair to say that there must be ETI? and if so you do agree that Design Detect is valid for this type of topic.

Can I withhold my judgement until some evidence occurs? I know this is a radical concept for you, but some people choose to withhold making decisions until they have some facts.

Thanks,
TVOR

[Steve]

Originally Posted by The Voice of Reason

You are absolutely correct! IF they did detect evidence. See how that "Evidence" thing works? When evidence is present, we can make determinations about the validity of a hypothesis. When evidence is not present (as in the case of ID), we can only guess. Did you see that? No slight of hand - just plain old logic.

Originally Posted by The Voice of Reason

Can I withhold my judgement until some evidence occurs? I know this is a radical concept for you, but some people choose to withhold making decisions until they have some facts.

Ok how bout you read this bit again.

Originally Posted by steve

My point was that Seti is based on Design Detection! and also that if they did detect evidence then they could draw a logical conclusion that there is Inteligence out there. We here on earth are surrounded by the very type of evidence that the Seti scientists are looking for, so much of what we see appears very Designed, isnt that evidence to support that there is a designer and if not explain why? If the many scientist that are using the SETI project to look for ETI just applied their same logic to what we see on earth they would have an abundance of the very type of evidence they are looking for!

Originally Posted by steve

Oh and just out of interest, if the SETI project today did pick up a whole 5 minites worth of "alien" music from another planet in another galaxy. What would you conclude? Would it be fair to say that there must be ETI? and if so you do agree that Design Detect is valid for this type of topic.

Maybe read this part twice...
"If the many scientist that are using the SETI project to look for ETI just applied their same logic to what we see on earth they would have an abundance of the very type of evidence they are looking for!"
now read what you wrote in regard to this type of evidence "When evidence is not present (as in the case of ID), we can only guess. Did you see that? No slight of hand - just plain old logic."
This exact type of evidence that SETI is looking for you say is not present in the case of ID, are you blind?

Oh and i liked this part when talkabout this type of evidence you said "When evidence is present, we can make determinations about the validity of a hypothesis." Good so your now happy for me to present this type of evidence.


Oh and "You are absolutely correct! IF they did detect evidence."
So you do except Design Detection provided somthing is detected! Nice good to see your starting to see the light

[Pah]

Intelligence detection? Perhaps you had better define again exactly what Intelligent Design is and how it correlates to the lambasting of evolution science

[Steve]

Originally Posted by pah

Intelligence detection? Perhaps you had better define again exactly what Intelligent Design is and how it correlates to the lambasting of evolution science

Design Detection is a way to detect Intelligence! perhaps you could tell me how you detect Intelligence? would looking for the result of that Intelligence be a fair test? Is that not the point in SETI?

[painted wolf]

or its an exersize of human design recognition behavior. Humans are hard wired to detect designs. Is a horse seen in the shape of a cloud evidence of Intelligence?
No.

SETI's aim is to capture a non-natural repeating signal indicitive of communication by extraterrestrial beings. Simple repeating patterns are found all the time in nature and are not indications of intelligence. Pulsars, Quasars and other space phenomina create such patterns. Infact repeating patterns/designs are clear indication of lack of inteligence as far as SETI is concerned.

Then there is Chaos theory and the formation of complex patterns such as Fractals through randomness/chaos.

wa:do