"Intelligent Design" and "Irreducible complexity"

[video=youtube;W96AJ0ChboU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=W96AJ0ChboU[/video]

This video is masterful in its simplicity and conversational tone. It also addresses the often-repeated examples of "irreducible complexity" in organisms that creationists raise.

 

Why do evolutionists continue to place intelligent design with creationism?

 

Could you describe for me how they are not separate ideas?

 

They're the same thing.

 

They seem strongly related, at least. But I think Rockytop is saying they aren't, and I am interested to hear more.

 

You can't believe that God created the Universe, but also that we evolved from a more simple species?

 

So creationism doesn't necessarily preclude evolution? Is that what you are saying? I could see that. But Intelligent design does need creationism, so there is a strong connection.

 

L

As a deist, creationism absolutely precludes evolution.

Believing in a galaxy imploding to create a universe is just as crazy as believing a supreme being created a universe and let it be.

 

1. Cosmological hypotheses and theories such as the Big Bang have absolutely nothing at all to do with evolution. Nothing.

2. You say the two are equally crazy, but you've added an extra level of complexity in that you are adding an all powerful all knowing eternal being. Logically, that makes creationism more complex, because you now need to explain how this unobserved super being came to be. And if you go with "he just always was," then you didn't really explain anything at all.

 

.

 

I was slightly intoxicated during that post and not exactly sure what I was trying to get at.

You raise some good points, but I'm going with "he just always was." There are some things I don't care about explanations for.

 

Unless "God" is just a metaphor for the Universe, which is nothing more than an organism of unfathomable complexity that is constantly evolving.

 

You have to explain how something came into being in either case (in one case, God. In the other, a galaxy that could implode). In the case of God, you have "exists by metaphysical necessity" as an explanation. In the case of a galaxy, that is much less plausible.

 

The guy's accent was too hoity toity for me.

What if it's all just a dream?

 

Suppose there is an omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent God. Do you think it's possible that his supreme existence is so complex that man is incapable of explaining or understanding? Can a worm explain how man came to be?

 

Definitely not a female worm.

 

She needs to be worried about making dirt sammiches anyway.

 

In which case he doesn't care whether I go balls deep in the cutie at the bar?

 

What if I used to read "Word Up" magazine?

 

Trey Parker the South Park guy.

Parker: Basically ... out of all the ridiculous religion stories which are greatly, wonderfully ridiculous — the silliest one I've ever heard is, 'Yeah ... there's this big giant universe and it's expanding, it's all gonna collapse on itself and we're all just here just 'cause ... just 'cause'. That, to me, is the most ridiculous explanation ever.

Food for thought.