Discussions on Rationally Speaking
Not really rationally speaking . . .
To add to this discussion (or any other,) please use the Contact form.
I agree with core of the article . . . but the worst thing about the “intelligent design” movement is that; this is an obvious waste of minimal resources. There is only so much money for education floating around why waste it on bunk?
I am not a geneticist and yet this reasoning makes no sense to me.
Hey just like a hemophiliac! Some people’s genetic inheritance and expression will lead to this protein synthesis encoding going awry. This is proof of BAD design; or weak design; a mutative break down in the negative direction; or its proof of no-design; but a micro-intuitive God is a silly thing to suggest - or a God of the gaps. Gaps in understanding are just that; gaps. But often time and research will demonstrate otherwise; a natural reason; and information obtained from nature. “Belief” and “belief systems” have no place in science; and are irrelevant. If a God (concept) is responsible for the gaps in your worldview keep it there, hold on to it; and so what; it has nothing to do with science.
If it’s a deathblow it’s a deathblow to reasoning. Merely suggesting intelligent design can be tabled until Q-God? is an answered question. As the other front; the multitude of non-“belief”-based science; genetics makes headway left, right and forward every single day - even conceding an irrelevant point on a conceptualization of transcendence that “God Exists” yields no new scientific understanding. It is mere assumption based upon more bad reasoning. It is irrelevant to even suggest it. Contrary to the mere “designer exists” suggestion - evidence for evolution is overwhelming; and intelligent design is nothing more than mere suggestion. If I were to take this absurd reason to a logical end; I would have to assume anything with apparent structure is evidence of the assumption; that there is a micro-intuitive God? What about snowflakes this too equals the micro-intuitive-God-concept. This God is a snowflake designer - just how are these complex and beautiful structures created, quite literally, out of thin air and water - out of laws that exist in nature; not in super-nature.
Intelligent design “of life” or anything is mere assumption. It is a suggestion of belief and is not a part of science. One can believe in God and be scientist; why not. But no new understanding, no new axioms; laws; or facts are revealed by bringing a religious worldview into science or into scientific evolution theory. There is no need for the “God of the Gaps”; this micro-intuitive God concept. And most of all it is a waste of resources.