Species Formation By Intelligent Design

First time ever observed: Primitive Slime-Mold Protoplasm developing into the most advanced lifeform!...

When the Discovery Institute talks about species formation, they never really get to the part describing what that would look like. Now we know. For IDists advocate repeated formation of organisms, yet without natural selection, all done by an "Unknown" Designer. This would mean we should see today repeated examples of organisms spontaneously appearing- or else an explanation of why we suddenly no longer see it today.

At the same time, they decry evolution, for the IDists presume against all instruction to the contrary that biologists advocate "dogs turning into cats". Yet from the very beginning evolution has advocated that there are *no* hopeful monsters, or instantaneous changes like you find on the X-Men. The irony is that the very strawman that ID creates about evolution, is ultimately what ID believes. So when the IDist mocks their made-up view of evolution, they are in truth attacking their own hypothesis.

Thank God, however, we now see this spontaneous species formation, and can therefore confirm the truth of Intelligent Design.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• evolution
• cat
• Intelligent Design
• strawman

[achilles197474]

"All the evidence available in the biological sciences supports the core proposition of traditional natural theology--that the cosmos is a specially designed whole with life and mankind as its fundamental goal and purpose, a whole in which all facets of reality, from the size of galaxies to the thermal capacity of water, have their meaning and explanation in this central fact."(p. 389) - Nature's Destiny by Michael Denton

[abdulmuhib]

@achilles197474 Hmm. A number of errors here.

1) You're quoting Denton. He's been proven innumerable times to be a very poor source. You might as well quote Gish.

2) You miss understand the word "evidence" or "support"- one of the two. It's not possible to evidence to support- or deny - your proposition, any more than it is possible for God to create a rock too big for him to lift.

[achilles197474]

@abdulmuhib Not so. The human genome is a digital database of information equivalent to an entire set of Encyclopedia Britannica. Information is the result of intelligence. To believe this digital database of information was created by mutations is a fairytale for adults.

[abdulmuhib]

@achilles197474 Well, I guess I'd have to ask, what do you mean by Information? If you mean information in the sense that the Discovery Institute uses it, then we have nothing to talk about, since you have chosen to use a term within a specific field of science in a way that no one who advocates that field uses it, and you are quite welcome to do so, but that is mere nonsense from the perspective of that field.

[abdulmuhib]

@achilles197474 I can say the "Periodic Table" means "oranges", but you won't be able to talk to any Chemists if I insist on my Orange Definition.

However, if you mean information in the way that Information Science uses it, then I would have to ask, "Who told you that information is the result of intelligence?" Where did you learn that?

[abdulmuhib]

@achilles197474 3) You (or Denton) are confusing the Weak and Strong Anthropomorphic Principles. Life could not exist without the narrow parameters we find, that is true. That does not logically imply that it was created for us. It could be created for multiple species. It could be that we are simply the logical conclusion of the circumstances that formed us.

[Lbbhecht]

This video really is attacking a strawman.. Yes, ID is pathetic, but please don't sink to their level and commit their same fallacies.

[13LuxAeterna13]

Nice:)I expected something scary at first.

[abdulmuhib]

@loupax Well, I've limited Copernicus' interactions on my site, so I'm not sure how successful he is.

[loupax]

OMG, I see one successfull troll! Love it!

[TomahawkTerror]

OMG, Did that blob monster just give birth to a cat? lol jk ;)

[rabbitwho]

@CopernicusRules all there is *to* it