Amazing Biological Nanotechnology

[Radrook]

When have I ever claimed such a thing? You might want to stop putting words in my mouth.

You refer to the science community as if it excludes theists. So I inferred that's what you meant. Same as I saying "The theist community...." It is an all-encompassing term.

 

[Skreeper]

You refer to the science community as if it excludes theists. So I made inferred that's what you meant. Same as I saying "The theist community...." It is an all-encompassing term.

That would be silly. The scientific community has both theists and atheists. But they keep their religious beliefs out of their work, that's the difference between them and creationists.

 

[Radrook]

That would be silly. The scientific community has both theists and atheists. But they keep their religious beliefs out of their work, that's the difference between them and creationists.

I disagree that a person ceases to be scientist when he infers intelligent design from what he observes in nature.

 

[Skreeper]

I disagree that a person ceases to be scientist when he infers intelligent design from what he observes in nature.

True, but science doesn't solely rely on observations. You actually have to back up your claims through testing. Especially, if others don't agree with the observations.

 

[Radrook]

True, but science doesn't solely rely on observations. You actually have to back up your claims through testing. Especially, if others don't agree with the observations.

True, but science doesn't solely rely on observations. You actually have to back up your claims through testing. Especially, if others don't agree with the observations.

FAQ: Does intelligent design make predictions? Is it testable?

 

[Skreeper]

FAQ: Does intelligent design make predictions? Is it testable?

This link has already been exposed as junk "science": Exons, Introns, and ID

And you never respond when your claims and links are challenged.

 

[Radrook]

This link has already been exposed as junk "science": Exons, Introns, and ID

And you never respond when your claims and links are challenged.

I don't respond because there is NOTHING you can say to convince me that what is observed in nature is the result of mindless chemicals. To me the mindless genius idea is utter nonsense and the link I offered very effectively exposes it as utter nonsense despite your claims to the contrary.

 

[Speedwell]

I don't respond because there is NOTHING you can say to convince me that what is observed in nature is the result of mindless chemicals. To me the mindless genius idea is utter nonsense and the link I offered very effectively exposes it as utter nonsense despite your claims to the contrary.

You don't think God is smart enough to make self-assembling biological structures?

 

[Skreeper]

I don't respond because there is NOTHING you can say to convince me that what is observed in nature is the result of mindless chemicals. To me the mindless genius idea is utter nonsense and the link I offered very effectively exposes it as utter nonsense despite your claims to the contrary.

Your logical fallacy is personal incredulity

 

[bhsmte]

I disagree that a person ceases to be scientist when he infers intelligent design from what he observes in nature.

When this person can not provide a scientific definition of ID and or provide the falsifiable test for ID, they are not doing science.

 

[bhsmte]

This link has already been exposed as junk "science": Exons, Introns, and ID

And you never respond when your claims and links are challenged.

Yes, I have noticed some posts just get ignored. I wonder why that is?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I don't respond because there is NOTHING you can say to convince me ...

Speaks for itself really.

 

[Radrook]

You don't think God is smart enough to make self-assembling biological structures?

What is theistic evolution?

 

[bhsmte]

What is theistic evolution?

What does this link say about Speedwells question?

 

[Radrook]

If it quacks like intelligent design, waddles like intelligent design and easily flies like intelligent design then it is intelligent design.

 

[bhsmte]

If it quacks like intelligent design, waddles like intelligent design and easily flies like intelligent design then it is intelligent design.

How do you test in a reliable way, to determine if something quacks like ID?

 

[Radrook]

Telling me differently is like trying to convince me that a duck is a moose by putting fake tiny antlers on its head.

 

[bhsmte]

Telling me differently is like trying to convince me that a duck is a moose by putting fake tiny antlers on its head.

I am not telling you, I am asking you; how do you test in a reliable way to determine if something quacks like ID. If you can not produce an objective falsifiable test, you are merely spouting opinion, which you are certainly welcome to.

 

[Radrook]

Incessant repetition of faulty reasoning isn't going to convince nor force a rational person to abandon rationality.

 

[bhsmte]

Incessant repetition of faulty reasoning isn't going to convince nor force a rational person to abandon rationality.

Are you just making random comments, or are you actually responding to a specific post on this thread and if so, why not use the reply function?

How do you determine faulty reasoning? Is verifiable evidence involved in making this determination?