Design: intelligent or not?

No, no, not the bible and such. Intense scrutiny of the natural world. I referred not to ancient philosophy but an esoteric model, a notation, that in the simplest of terms describes the phenomena that we wonder at.

It is also technology. The technology involved is unfamiliar to you and found to be suspect. The technology used for Mayan calendar was not UL listed, but the product rivals anything produced today.

 

i dont understand the definition of intelligent design. Is that using science for a replacement of religion? I read it on wikipedia? Or that the smartest animal survives? Please expand on that because i like the naturel selection idea.

 

Intelligent design is the idea that species were designed by a being. There are essentially two main forms of intelligent design. The first is creationist intelligent design. This is the idea that species are immutable aboriginal creations which were directly designed and created by a being (god).

The other main form of intelligent design is that there was a prime cause to the formation of life and the subsequent diversification of that life. The idea here is that a being created the laws and circumstances which, when put into motion, eventually gave rise to life and the diversification of life.

The term intelligent design most often refers to the idea that species are immutable aboriginal creations. In the United States it is certainly true that the intelligent design movement was started by, and is mostly composed of, christian creationists. For example when the supreme court recently ruled on the teaching of intelligent design in schools the representatives of intelligent design in that case were all christian creationists. Non of them were the more rational "prime cause" type of design advocate.

The creationist intelligent design advocates deny evolution whereas the "prime cause" advocates often say that evolution is the mechanism through which god creates.

 

That's math, not technology.
-----------
editorial commet because the whole mayan thing pisses me off:

30 years ago, no one knew anything about the Mayans.

In the last 15 years everyone's become a expert.

When the world doesn't end in 2012, will you renounce thier "technology'?

 

seeing as it made humans, whether or not intelligence was involved in any possible "design" is certainly questionable.

 

that's selling the "theory" short.

Superman gets the credit for designing EVERYTHING in existence, not just species.

which still begs the question who designed him?

 

it bears repeating!

 

So its sorta like some divine being came down on earth one day and created everything?

 

It always comes down to the question of Freewill
I'll go so far as to say if freewill exist than god exist (but it's not a requirement for the existence of god).

However, Uncertainty and applied Chaos Theory allow for the appearence of freewill without the need for it to actually exist.

 

The calender is the product not the technology
-----------

You have me confused with someone else and are scolding me for your past. I have no beliefs about the Mayan calender nor am I an expert on Mayan culture.
I am just telling you that modern western science is not the only repository of knowledge and there have been "scientific" men throughout the ages. Flint nappers, metallurgists, engineers, architects, horticulturalists, et al

 

boiled down, it's the biblical story of creation dressed up to look more sophisticated.

When creationism inevitably became the joke that it is, the creationist re-grouped. since genesis was rejected even by the catholic church, it became urgent to deflect what amounted to a rejection of the need for god; hence, god created evolution is now the official party line.
---------
But the difference is only one of degree.
An imaginary, indescibable creature is still required.

 

Calenders are a product of math, not technology.
----------
as for the other--
I wasn't addressing you in particular, hence

"editorial commet because the whole mayan thing pisses me off:"

 

Yes sir, thank you. The technology is the quality of observation. As well, a calendar is a technology.


----------

Are you sure. It seems like your initial reactions to what I am saying reflect a bitter prejudice, to the extent that you are drawing conclusions about what I am saying.

 

Yes if I had to infer the characteristics of the alleged designer based on the state of nature I would probably go with Sadistic Design or at best Indifferent Design. The first being the idea that god obviously created a world of biological strife because he gets a kick out of it. Why else would we have snakes with hypodermic needles in their mouths full of poison roaming wild? The latter being the idea that if there is a god he obviously doesn't care about creation and isn't anywhere around here. Why else would evil and good occur so randomly?

 

you're reaching.

Mayan's had eyeballs, brians, rocks and sticks.
---------

What you are saying is non-sequiter. Your spinning your facts way to hard to rationalize your belief.

How the maya calender connects to intelligent design is something your going to have to explain.

 

I like you and I appreciate your patience with this discourse. You're recoiling.
I am not attempting to rationalize a belief but expose a prejudice. There have been many superstitions emerge from the past and there are many superstitions in this world still. In the same turn there exists now superior understandings and the same is true for the past.
---------

The only reason I used the example of Mayan calendar was to demonstrate the quality of results that may be obtained from what you surmise to be inferior science.

 

Inferior science? Don't project. That's your inference, not mine.

All science is of a piece. No inferior/superior. There is only relative right.

And we can make a far, far more accurate calender than any of the ancients; just as we can give an answer to the ID question that is far more encompassing than the ancients could.

You'll have to cite a "superior understanding...in the past".

 

i could understand that. It wouldnt be my first belief but yeah most beliefs are really logical if studied. lol

 

You're right, I take your statements that we can make a far more accurate calendar or give a far more encompassing answer to the ID question, too far.

I did already but here is another one. The native Americans relationship to and understanding of the sustainable use of the natural environment.

 

This is a PC myth.

For the most part, Amerindians simply took until there was nothing left, burned everything, and moved on. These methods allowed no large congregations of people to form, so the area devastated was relatively small and recoverd relatively quickly. see National Geographic for confirmation.