Is there any proof in favor of intelligent design?

Page 1 of 1 [ 7 posts ] 

MonsterCrack
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 1 Jul 2015
Age: 25
Posts: 735
Location: John's Creek, Georgia

20 Sep 2015, 3:11 pm

or any proof against evolution or darwinism? my family is part of the gulen movement, and follows the teachings of said nursi and m. fethullah gulen, needless to say, the leader does not believe in evolution or darwinism for religious and scientific reasons (many in the movement are educated scientists and they use science to disprove evolution....)... Is there any proof against evolution?



Phemto
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

Joined: 7 Sep 2015
Posts: 217
Location: Gaitherburg MD

20 Sep 2015, 6:30 pm

Nope.
There are no doubt people who disagree with me, but it usually comes from a misunderstanding of what "proof" means, or is based of pieces of evidence that turn out to be fictitious.

I give you high marks for asking questions. That's the first step to FINDING THINGS OUT, arguably the greatest human superpower.

Also A+ for asking about evolution "or" Darwinism. Evolution (the fact that species' nature and composition changes over time) was generally scientifically accepted before Darwin was even born. What no one could figure out until he and Wallace was the mechanism.



izzeme
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Apr 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,665

21 Sep 2015, 3:34 am

There are question marks on several points in "Darwinian" evolution; even the most die-hard evolutionary biologists admit that bit: Darwin made mistakes, but mainly becouse he couldn't have known better (DNA was not yet discovered, for example).

However, evolution in and of itself stands without a shadow of a doubt, we can see it happen in the lab, and humans have been using it to their advantage since before the dark ages: what else would cross- and selective breeding of crops and cattle be other than guided evolution?

Evolution makes certain traits of a living being become more or less pronounced under outside influences (to put it very simplisticly). usually, this is the environment, but under selective breeding, this "outside influence" is humans.


There is no proof for intelligent design, and nothing that even appears to disprove the general idea of evolution. the best that can be done is refining our ideas on the exact drives and mechanisms of evolution (which is what is being done anyway), but disproving evolution itself? no, no way, that is as close to a fact as you can get in science.


also, as stated: A+ for asking, asking questions is how answers are found



Phemto
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

Joined: 7 Sep 2015
Posts: 217
Location: Gaitherburg MD

21 Sep 2015, 5:03 am

Good point. Darwin didn't get everything right. That's one of the things that the ID folks don't quite understand. In science, you can put forward a theory, and then people beat on it. It might get disproved, or it might get built upon. What just about never happens is that you get everything right from the start.

Those on the ID side sometimes have trouble conceptualizing that. They're more used to the ideas of infallible saints and divine inspiration. The idea that a theory still has holes that need to be filled seems like a weakness of the theory. It can't be right if people disagree about parts of it, right?

In science, theories do three things at the same time. They answer questions, they let you make predictions, and they make you ask better questions. The biggest question Darwinian theory asked what just how traits get passed down. Darwin had his shot at the answer and it wasn't even close to what we know now.

Here's a good example of a prediction that came out of evolutionary theory. Humans have one less chromosome pair than the other apes (23 vs 24). If we came from a common ancestor, then were two possible explanations. Either the common ancestor had 23 pairs, and at some point there was a fusion event between two chromosomes, or the common ancestor had 24, and two of the chromosomes fused at some point. Either way, there should be residual evidence in the DNA sequences. It took a few years to find the answer, but it was found when human chromosome 2 was sequenced. It's a fusion of two of the chimp chromosomes.



AsahiPto17
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 20 Oct 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 476

21 Sep 2015, 5:47 am

Why do people always think that evolution and intelligent design are mutually exclusive? I don't think that you can say that evolution isn't real, and frankly to say that it can't be real if you believe in God is pretty narrow minded. On the other side, I personally think that life is way too complex for things to be random. There are still a lot of things that show that there are things beyond this plane of existence of you look in the right places.

I imagine that a being that controls the fabric of space and time could set things up to work as they do with evolution, it makes sense for life to be adaptive and self reliant. It's like little creatures who exist in a computer simulation arguing about whether or not they were created by something just because their whole world is well designed and seamless to the point where they see no outside influence.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,750
Location: Stendec

21 Sep 2015, 6:21 am

AsahiPto17 wrote:
Why do people always think that evolution and intelligent design are mutually exclusive?
Evolution does not require a "god", while Intelligent Design was invented to force evolutionists to include the Christian God.
AsahiPto17 wrote:
I don't think ... I personally think ... I imagine ...
Enough said.



Phemto
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

Joined: 7 Sep 2015
Posts: 217
Location: Gaitherburg MD

21 Sep 2015, 11:34 am

AsahiPto17 wrote:
Why do people always think that evolution and intelligent design are mutually exclusive?

ID was created specifically to try to counter evolution, so yes, they are mutually exclusive. However, you can believe in God and not ID, and plenty of people believe in God and evolution at the same time.

AsahiPto17 wrote:
I personally think that life is way too complex for things to be random. There are still a lot of things that show that there are things beyond this plane of existence of you look in the right places.


The most complexity comes from things that are completely random. Complexity is the opposite of a sign of design. As for things that "show that there are things beyond this plane of existence," there are plenty of scientists who know it's a guaranteed Nobel if they could prove it, but so far, everything that looked promising has turned out to be a misunderstanding on some level. It's looking like we are on a single plane, albeit a fabulously beautiful and complex one. The more you come to understand that complexity the less likely any other planes become, but also the less you need them to feel a sense of excitement and awe for just being here.