Dumb Design vs Intelligent design

[Kosmo]

Hehe, stupid.

[The Postman]

If someone asks about it in science class refer to religion or philosophy class.

I <3 U Mawibse.

[mawibse]

http://www.newsday.com/news/science/wir ... -headlines

The mousetrap anology sounded pretty sane at first but then I thought about it and it fell apart, would be interesting to talk to him and ask how he reason about it.

[Pericolos0]

lol its michael behe, he keeps failing to see that evolution does not work like a moustrap anaology and that there are also hypotheses that make the evoltion of those bacterial flagellums possible without divinde intervention. His theories and submissions to peer reviewed scientific magazines keep getting ripped apart.

[Kosmo]

I just wish those ID retards would stop using their one and only thing against evolution theory "it's too complicated", if they don't understand it they should just keep their mouths shut.

ID is way too easy to be true, how the fuck can you explain anything with "it just is" all the time?

[ginsengavenger]

he's tenured, he can quack any tune he likes, and i'm sure he's well compensated for it.

[mawibse]

Well "it just is" isn't super uncommon amongst scientists either but at least they want to know more.

And the mousetrap anology sucks because I can think of lots of uses for each individual part of the mouse trap so no reason for each part not to get evolved.

Infact, if you think of it thats how the mousetrap came to be in the first place, wood working, metalurgy into springs, claps and what not was not created for the sole purpose of making mouse traps so...

[RD]

Yesterday on National Geographic there was a show about our common ancestor called Search for Adam. The spectabular results of the genographic project:

Adam lived 60.000 years ago near Tanzania Africa. O m g.

All humans are descendants of this one human and not from apes or the neanderthals or homo erectus or whatever.

http://blogs.nationalgeographic.com/cha ... _adam.html

[Kosmo]

Fascinating study indeed.

But where did Adam come from? Did he just appear from thin air?

[RD]

who knows

Its not the biblical adam btw, but scientific adam

[mawibse]

The only reason for a non religous study to refer to something religious by name is to get attention which nocks off lots of points in my book.

Perhaps we should call the search for a unified theory for "scientific god"?

[Kosmo]

Adam is a proper metaphor for the first human, so I don't see anything bad about it.

"Scientific god" it's that good term since god is not a scientific term, maybe it should be more like deus ex machina or something like that

It surely changed everything.

[RD]

The only reason for a non religous study to refer to something religious by name is to get attention which nocks off lots of points in my book.

Perhaps we should call the search for a unified theory for "scientific god"?

The project is called the genographic project, not search for Adam. The name of the show, Search for Adam is just short and descriptive. Besides that, theres not much points to knock off from genetic research, unless u dont believe in DNA

[The Postman]

Yesterday on National Geographic there was a show about our common ancestor called Search for Adam. The spectabular results of the genographic project:

Adam lived 60.000 years ago near Tanzania Africa. O m g.

All humans are descendants of this one human and not from apes or the neanderthals or homo erectus or whatever.

http://blogs.nationalgeographic.com/cha ... _adam.html

:giantrolleyesvomitingsmallerrolleyes:

That article sounds like trash if they don't think we came from common branching ancestory.

[RD]

why wouldnt i