Evolution and the myth of "scientific consensus"

[Oncedeceived]

And, scramble mode has ensued.

Scrambling from what? What in this latest discussion has anything to scramble from in your mind? Amazing.

 

[JacksBratt]

Carl Sagan, now there is a clown to laugh at....
[/QUOTE]

 

[The Cadet]

Carl Sagan, now there is a clown to laugh at....

Yes, one of the most meaningful philosophers of science of the 20th century, a storied astrophysicist and astrobiologist, and one of the greatest science communicators of all time. What a clown!

 

[Jan Volkes]

You wouldn't interpret the evidence in any other way than what your materialistic worldview will allow.

A worldview you use in every department of your life other than your religion, only for your religion are you prepared to do without evidence.

 

[Oncedeceived]

A worldview you use in every department of your life other than your religion, only for your religion are you prepared to do without evidence.

You have misunderstood. There is evidence of design not only in living things but in the universe. The evidence is evident by its very appearance. The fact that you deny that evidence and claim it is just an illusion actually means that you accept evidence in everything else excluding the evidence that points to design.

 

[The Cadet]

You have misunderstood. There is evidence of design not only in living things but in the universe. The evidence is evident by its very appearance. The fact that you deny that evidence and claim it is just an illusion actually means that you accept evidence in everything else excluding the evidence that points to design.

How do we detect "design"?

 

[AV1611VET]

...

Jesus was laughed at as well.[VERSE=Luke 8:53,KJV]And they laughed him to scorn, knowing that she was dead.[/VERSE]

 

[bhsmte]

How do we detect "design"?

Since there is no verifiable or falsifiable test to detect it, you would have to rely on your own psyche to identify it.

 

[Oncedeceived]

How do we detect "design"?

It has been detected and dismissed as an illusion as perpetrated by Dawkins and others.

 

[crjmurray]

Jesus was laughed at as well.[VERSE=Luke 8:53,KJV]And they laughed him to scorn, knowing that she was dead.[/VERSE]

That's nice.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Since there is no verifiable or falsifiable test to detect it, you would have to rely on your own psyche to identify it.

If one must claim that the design we are detecting is an illusion it is apparent and in evidence.

 

[The Cadet]

It has been detected and dismissed as an illusion as perpetrated by Dawkins and others.

Yes, I understand you think you see design. But how do you determine what actually is designed? I mean, there are plenty of natural structures that are phenomenally complex and beautiful, but which arise by completely mindless natural processes. How can we tell whether it's real, or merely something we projected onto it?

 

[Loudmouth]

Ok, remember that you said that there is no evidence for any plant life prior to the Cambrian explosion. Your double standard is showing.

There is no evidence of plant life prior to the Cambrian explosion. However, none of my arguments require there being no plant life prior the Cambrian explosion.

Your argument does rest on the claim that there are no ancestors for the species found in the Cambrian. The problem is that you have no evidence for this claim.

 

[Loudmouth]

If one must claim that the design we are detecting is an illusion it is apparent and in evidence.

If it is an illusion, then it isn't evidence.

 

[Loudmouth]

Can you see me rolling my eyes?

I can see you avoiding the facts.

 

[Loudmouth]

They worship the created rather than the Creator.

You are projecting. They don't worship anything.

 

[AV1611VET]

That's nice.

For the record, God laughs too.

But at something else.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Yes, I understand you think you see design. But how do you determine what actually is designed? I mean, there are plenty of natural structures that are phenomenally complex and beautiful, but which arise by completely mindless natural processes.

I would ask what you call phenomenally complex that we know for certain were made by natural processes alone.

I don't just think I "see" design. Dawkins, Crick and most biologists see that appearance of design and some have concluded that evolution alone could not have been responsible while others dismiss it as an illusion.

 

[Oncedeceived]

You are projecting. They don't worship anything.

You can't speak for everyone.

 

[Oncedeceived]

I can see you avoiding the facts.

Oh, what facts am I avoiding?