Has a single ID-related experiment been done ever?

Pete Harcoff · May 10, 2005

Just a simple question: Has there been an actual scientific experiment with respect to the so-called "Intelligent Design theory"? IOW, something with materials and methods, data and conclusions. Something beyond mere opinion, philosophizing or theorizing.

And if anyone wants to derail the thread asking for evolution related experiments, I'll save you the trouble with a handful of examples combed from thousands available in the scientific literature:

Genomic evolution during a 10,000-generation experiment with bacteria
Experimental Adaptation of Salmonella typhimurium to Mice
Directed evolution of Pseudomonas aeruginosa lipase for improved amide-hydrolyzing activity

Pete Harcoff · May 11, 2005

Nothing? C'mon, only one experiment. It's all I ask.

Silent Bob · May 11, 2005

Pete Harcoff said:
Nothing? C'mon, only one experiment. It's all I ask.

You are asking for one too many...

Btw I have an experiment for IDists.

A) Take a population of plants and breed them.
B) With each new generation pray for them to produce money instead of flowers.
If ID is true and the Jesus' statement about prayer also stands then we will all become millionaire gardeners!

Arikay · May 11, 2005

The problem is, How?
Until ID becomes something more than gaps and God, they seem to be stuck searching for things they think are designed and then declaring them designed.

Army of Juan · May 11, 2005

Pete Harcoff said:
Has a single ID-related experiment been done ever?

It's created lots of these type of threads, am i rite? ^_^

Pete Harcoff · May 11, 2005

Arikay said:
The problem is, How?
Until ID becomes something more than gaps and God, they seem to be stuck searching for things they think are designed and then declaring them designed.

I'm thinking something along the lines of genetic engineering on acid. For example, IDists love to talk about how molecular machines (the flagellum, for example) is designed, so maybe they could experiment building entirely new structures in existing organisms.

Or they do love to talk about the origin of body plans in the Cambrian explosion, so maybe they could work on engineering entirely new body plans from scratch and see how feasible that is.

Not that this would necessarily prove a designer per-say, but it would give them a better baseline for comparison. I'm pretty sick of all the comparisons to inorganic devices. How about some organic-to-organic comparisons for a change?

JohnR7 · May 11, 2005

Cronic said:
B) With each new generation pray for them to produce money instead of flowers.

There are laws that govern prosperity just as there are laws that regulate natural selecton. If you do not want to take the time to learn the laws, then don't expect that you can get them to work for you. We know that Prosperity for soul, mind and body is God's will for all His children.

JohnR7 · May 11, 2005

Pete Harcoff said:
maybe they could work on engineering entirely new body plans from scratch and see how feasible that is.

This is not to far off into the future. I was watching a program on TV about the top ten resorts in Hawaii. One of the resorts spent millions of dollars building a natural wild life preserve. They had developed a compleat ecological system using all natural elements so that you could not really tell that it was man made. The reason you can usually tell that a garden is planted is because the flowers are lined up in neat rows and organized in a way that shows a design other than a natural design that we find in nature.

There is no reason that science can not synthesis two molecular units together. We have had synthetics for years. This is a basic belief of ID is that we can become designers ourselves.

JohnR7 · May 11, 2005

Arikay said:
The problem is, How?
Until ID becomes something more than gaps and God, they seem to be stuck searching for things they think are designed and then declaring them designed.

Natural laws, even natural selecton creates a design. It is simply semantics if you want to call that a intelligent design or not. Untill someone comes up with a explaination for the natural laws (natural selecton included) then we either admit we do not know where they come from or we believe that they were created by an intelligent designer.

Ishmael Borg · May 11, 2005

JohnR7 said:
Natural laws, even natural selecton creates a design. It is simply semantics if you want to call that a intelligent design or not. Untill someone comes up with a explaination for the natural laws (natural selecton included) then we either admit we do not know where they come from or we believe that they were created by an intelligent designer.

Hey John, you're a proponent of ID. Can't you answer the simple question in the OP?

Loudmouth · May 11, 2005

JohnR7 said:
Natural laws, even natural selecton creates a design. It is simply semantics if you want to call that a intelligent design or not. Untill someone comes up with a explaination for the natural laws (natural selecton included) then we either admit we do not know where they come from or we believe that they were created by an intelligent designer.

Then we might as well argue that 2+2=4 is designed. If you are unable to distinguish between Intelligent Desing and Natural Design then ID is not needed.

Pete Harcoff · May 11, 2005

JohnR7 said:
This is not to far off into the future. I was watching a program on TV about the top ten resorts in Hawaii. One of the resorts spent millions of dollars building a natural wild life preserve. They had developed a compleat ecological system using all natural elements so that you could not really tell that it was man made. The reason you can usually tell that a garden is planted is because the flowers are lined up in neat rows and organized in a way that shows a design other than a natural design that we find in nature.

You've underlined a huge problem for ID, though. Like you said, the reason you can tell a garden has been planted by a person is because of the arrangement of the garden. And we know this because that is how we see people plant gardens. But if you had never seen a person plant a garden, would you conclude that it was designed? And if a person planted a garden such that it didn't show that arrangement, how could you tell if it was designed?

It's like other things in nature. Look at this picture of snowflakes. They appear to show design. But where they designed by intelligence? If you had no idea how they were made, what would you conclude? How could you conclude anything?

Has a single ID-related experiment been done ever?

PeteAce - In memory of WinAce

PeteAce - In memory of WinAce

Silent Bob

Guest

HI

Senior Member

PeteAce - In memory of WinAce

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Ishmael Borg

Guest

Contributor

PeteAce - In memory of WinAce

Similar threads