Evolution Intelligent Design debate Meyer V Ward 4of11

Peter Ward paleontologist and University of Washington Professor of Geology, Biology, Zoology and Astrobiology.

Stephen C Meyer is a senior fellow at the discovery institute and co-wrote the note to teachers at the end of the book "Of pandas and people" which was central to the Kitzmiller V Dover trial which concluded that Intelligent Design is not science. Along with fellow Discovery institute fellows John Angus Campbell and William Demski pulled out of the Dover trial after depositions from the plaintiff experts were taken and thus would not defend the Intelligent Design claims of the Discovery Institute under oath at this trial. The Discovery Institute also boasts among it's fellows "Moonie" Jonathan Wells (The moonies believe that Jesus Christ failed in his salvation plan and that Rev Moon from Korea is the second coming of Christ)

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=A1158E2C73489521

Category:

Education

Tags:

• evolution
• intelligent
• design
• creationism
• stephen
• meyer
• peter
• ward
• darwin
• discovery
• institute
• kitzmiller
• dover

[SnoopyDaniels]

@djarm67

1. Intelligence is quite obviously not supernatural. 2. ID is quite obviously not an argument from ignorance since it appeals to observable facts as evidence. 3. The independent specification does not have to be arbitrarily given "beforehand." In the case of biological information, the specification is functionality.

[djarm67]

@SnoopyDaniels 1 The "intelligence" proposed by the ID advocacy is supernatural. Read the trial documents. 2. Irreducible Complexity is an argument from ignorance. 3. You clearly do not understand Dembski's CSI.

[djarm67]

@alachabre In this case both sides cannot be right. The ID crowd attempt to suggest that ID creationism is science. Scientists explain why ID creationism is not science. The problem for ID creationism is that it isn't science as they are not adhering to the scientic method (methodological naturalism). As a side note: ID creationism does not deny that speciation occurs. That is the domain of many of the other versions of creationism.

[HighCardWins]

Do you realize the crap you must accept to believe in Christian Creationism? Talking snake, talking donkey, a man can live inside of a whale, angels came down from heaven and had sex with mortal women, talking flaming bush, etc. Basically, a whole lot of crazy bullshit.

[chris7777777777777]

It's little "t" theory, so yes, it is a theory, an idea.

[chris7777777777777]

2:10 that's because there's an agenda to destroy ID. It's the atheist agenda to destroy anybody who is smarter and more intuitive than them. ;o)

[chris7777777777777]

lol! Peter Ward is an idiot.

[odinata]

..a mission to undermine science--a political agenda.....

[estragon9]

Almost everything on intelligent design comes from one place - The Discovery Institute, an organization with a mission to have creationism taught in high schools.

[SnoopyDaniels]

@djarm67

1. That is irrelevant. Intelligence is not supernatural, therefore invoking intelligence as an explanation does not equate to invoking supernatural intelligence. You are trying to discredit ID advocates based on their religious beliefs, which is bigotry. 2. I challenge you to demonstrate how Irreducible Complexity is an argument from ignorance. 3. Listen to Dembski's own words. Functional requirements serve as an independently given meaningful pattern.

[djarm67]

@SnoopyDaniels Invoking the supernatural violates methodological naturalism, Irreducible Complexity is an argument from ignorance and the specified information in complex specified information is never specified beforehand.