Comments on: The Scientific Case for Intelligent Design https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/ Thu, 01 Oct 2009 11:41:49 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.8 By: marilove https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547184 Thu, 01 Oct 2009 11:41:49 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547184 A male friend of mine believes in Intelligent Design. He’s otherwise quite boyfriend worthy, but I can’t bring myself to date an ID believer 🙁

]]> By: tonyc https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547183 Thu, 01 Oct 2009 10:36:27 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547183

Why are Liars for Jeezus always […]a former…

because you have to be Saved of course! The more heinous your previous situation, the better, and it doesn’t get any more heinous (to a Xian) than atheism!
Look! Jeebus saved even this terrible sinner from his apostacy! Behold the Power_of_the_Lord_Jeebusâ?¢

]]> By: Greg Laden https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547182 Thu, 01 Oct 2009 09:54:38 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547182 Doyle: yes, that is depressing. Expected, but depressing.

Madsci: It seems that being one of us is excellent for cred-building.

]]> By: MadScientist https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547181 Thu, 01 Oct 2009 06:35:41 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547181 Why are Liars for Jeezus always:

1. a former skeptic
2. a former godless fornicator
3. a former gambler
4. a former drunkard

Why don’t any of them claim to have simply been born an ignorant Liar for Jeezus?

]]> By: Doyle https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547180 Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:29:21 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547180 While it is is easy to dismiss IDiots, it is also dangerous to underestimate their appeal. A few years ago, when I was teaching a course at UMN-Duluth, I offered extra credit to students if they attended a presentation on the “evidence” for ID and wrote a summary of it. Despite having spent the better part of a semester discussing evolution, and despite the fact that I lectured specifically on the fallacies of ID, I still had some students write about how convincing the evidence for ID was. Rather depressing…

]]> By: Jared https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547179 Wed, 30 Sep 2009 23:56:39 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547179 Snoof, your odds need adjusting
1) their arguments evolve, they’re never “new and original”–that should be â??:1; remember the “cdesign proponentsists” transitional form?
2) this guy seems like a complexity guy, teaching immunology and all. I’m going to go with “compliment cascade is too complex”–but I would feel bad with 3:2 odds; that should be 30:1 or higher.

]]> By: José https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547178 Wed, 30 Sep 2009 23:42:16 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547178 Your reading it wrong. The scientific case is simply an antique box filled with test tubes, beakers, and other sciencey stuff. It’s being auctioned off, with all the proceeds going into researching how different fruits fit in the human hand.

]]> By: Snoof https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547177 Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:27:04 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547177 Place your bets, folks! What arguments will Dr Bierle present?

Currently, I’ve got Cosmological Fine Tuning at 4:1, Mischaracterization of Evolution at 3:1, Irreducible Complexity at 3:2, Lack of Transitional Fossils at 1:3, Something New and Original at 15:1, and Genuine Scientific Evidence at 32767:1.

]]> By: ASternEmeraldInk https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547176 Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:52:53 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547176 …how promising, seems like it may be possible to have cake and eat it too.

]]> By: Lorax https://gregladen.com/blog/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547175 Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:11:55 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/09/30/the-scientific-case-for-intell/#comment-547175 Oh I see, Im good enough to invite to the psychobabble talk, but not good enough to escort you to a wedding. I get it, I embarrass you, you’re just like all the others…..

]]>