Hi Krimel, I think the concept of intelligent design depends on the definition of intelligence. We have been through this before so I won't belabor it, but doesn't the trial and errors and learning that occurs in evolution represent a form of intelligence? Semantically at least?
Thermodynamics is a self-contained system in physics which defines all terms with reference to each other. There is no possible way for it to be wrong. If I set up a system of definitions, it cannot be wrong because I make the definitions. This is similar to the notions that math cannot be wrong. Of course it can't. If I say The sun is hot, because heat comes from the sun, that can't be wrong either. Mark On Jan 15, 2010, at 11:58:09 AM, Krimel <[email protected]> wrote: You refuse to acknowledge that the universe is intelligently designed because it implies a Creator, yet you are a product of this design and all of Science thrives on its order and consistency. I would say there's more than a little hypocrisy in your disbelief. [Krimel] I reject intelligent design because I don't see the slightest shred of evidence to support it. Looking at the history of the movement, the arguments presented, the agendas of those promoting it and the other beliefs that support and flow from it, I just find it offensive. How is being offended by ignorance and stupidity hypocritical? BTW, still waiting for your admission that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics presents no problem to the theory of evolution Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
