gregorygarver.com

LisaB3646 · Joined: 10 Jul 2005 Posts: 4

It seems patently obvious to me that the universe and life itself is the result of an intelligent agency. I would conjecture that this should be so to most truly rational and logical individuals.The idea that blind causation and unintelligent processes can lead to the organic complexity and harmony that we see in the world is just nonsensical. Using semantics like "natural selection" to account for it is just a cop-out.So will cosmological and biological evolutionary theories eventually have to recognize an "intelligent principle" at work in the universe, if not a Divine Being?Or will Science persist in trying to explain the inexplicable?FED UP: You are confusing biblical "Creationism" with "Intelligent Design". I would be mad too if Genesis 1 was taken as a scientific account: it is a myth that attempts to explain a fundamental "truth".VT: Science is very good at investigating the nature of phenomena, limited by our perception of reality, but cannot account for the fundamental causes. At some point, we have to recognize that our subjective minds are finite and that we cannot even begin to understand the arcane mystery of existence.EVOLUTION: You obviously have a visceral and irrational hatred of the biblical creation myth. You have to understand that it is not meant to be a factual account but a way of describing the relationship between a Creator and is Creation. That is the nature of myth.

MaureenFrancis · Joined: 05 Oct 2006 Posts: 4

science is big on proving things. even if in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. the bible can't even agree on the order of creation or how man and woman was created. it can not be trusted as a scientific source.

JSAL21 · Joined: 21 Jul 2004 Posts: 3

I hope science persists in trying to explain the inexplicable.A few hundred years ago, it was patently obvious that flies spontaneously generated on dead flesh. Farther back, it was patently obvious that plague was spread by miasma.One glaring omission I've found in the religion vs science debate here is that scientists do not try to prove that God doesn't exist, it's just that His intervention cannot be measured by the scientific method, which is based on experimentation.In biology class, it was explained to me that all scientific hypotheses and theories must be falsifiable. That is, if a preponderance of evidence shows that a previously useful theory is false, a new one will be formulated. The presence of God is not falsifiable. There are no experiments to prove there is no God, so it stays a matter of faith, not science.

andresm · Joined: 20 Feb 2004 Posts: 7

There is absolutely nothing obvious about Intelligent design. There are no facts or evidence of substance to support it. It relies on inferences ( Our bodies are complex so that must mean God exists. Ta da). There is overwhelming evidence supporting the theory of evolution. You say it makes no sense. How does it make more sense to believe that a supernatural being, whose presence we can't sense in any way, just decided to make us exist? When will you finally give your religious dogma to finally see reason.

Fatality · Joined: 14 Apr 2006 Posts: 6

Unlike believers in magical, supernatural, invisible beings, science will continue to try to explain everything in logical, rational terms.They will never be satisfied with sitting back and attaching a lazy explanation that has no evidence to back it up to things simply because they don't currently understand them.

Belzetot · Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 2

Intelligent design was created by idiots to make their ridiculous fantasies sound reasonable. It consists of nothing more than the first book of the bible and a lot of double talk and babble that easily confuses and influences the minds of the simpletons who believe in jeebus and the rest of that rubbish.