UNINTELLIGENT DESIGN

I’m terribly saddened that intelligent design proponents have received so much attention. It doesn’t even matter that they appear negatively in media mentions because they are raising themselves to an “our idea versus your idea” platform that makes intelligent design seem like an alternative. The media has bought into this model, writing headlines such as “New Analyses Bolster Central Tenets of Evolution Theory“, which give the assumption that evolution needed to be bolstered in the first place.



Credit: Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (Wikipedia entry).

Next time a church freak gets in your face trashing evolution in favor of intelligent design, I suggest the Neverending Designer approach:

So we were designed by an intelligent being because we are so complex. Well that means that our designer is even more complex, and had to be designed himself. And so on. The loop never ends. In conclusion, you’re an idiot and I can’t wait until you die and find out there isn’t a heaven. Haha, joke’s on you!

It’s not a good idea to get personal.

23 thoughts on “UNINTELLIGENT DESIGN

  1. seenster

    This God fellow, the one who created us with his infinite wisdom or whatever – he’s got a great fucking sense of humour when it comes to killing us.

    I can’t wait until my existance as an animal suddenly comes to an end. Might as well pro-intelligent-create as often as possible until then.

  2. AUA

    Every time I hear the “too complex to have evolved by chance” argument, I think back to a passage in the Hitchhiker’s Guide To Galaxy. Replace “Babel Fish” with “Man.”

    ****

    “Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindboggingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.

    “The argument goes something like this: `I refuse to prove that I exist,’ says God, `for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.’

    “`But,’ says Man, `The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn’t it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don’t. QED.’

    “`Oh dear,’ says God, `I hadn’t thought of that,’ and promptly vanished in a puff of logic.

    “Oh, I hadn’t thought of that,” says God, who promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

  3. LaLa

    Whether you believe in a God who did create/design humanity and the universe…

    Or if you believe in evolution and purely scientific analysis of creation…

    It is more than any of us can comprehend. No one has the definitive answer. No one should be mocked for his or her beliefs on a subject that NO ONE has the “right” answer to.

  4. Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer

    DC Bachelor, thank you! Thank you very much, thank you for inviting me here today to debate a few issues! First of all, let me say how happy I am to be your nominee for the United States Senate! [ applause ] You know.. thank you.. I don’t really understand your Congress, or your system of checks and balances…because, as I said during the campaign – I’m just a caveman! I fell on some ice, and later got thawed out by scientists. But there is one thing I do know – we must do everything in our power to cut capital gains taxes, increase federal spending, eliminate FEMA, send more troops to Iraq, pardon Tom DeLay, Karl Rove and Bill Frist, defeat the Democrats and most importantly embrace intelligent design as de fact science. Thank you!

  5. new p

    i decided long ago that i will never have an answer to this. yes, i believe in God – do i believe that God put into motion the things that created the possibility for evolution? do i think God created it all in 6, 24 hour days?

    no clue. i think it is stupid to argue this no matter what side you’re on. we’re here and we have a hell of a lot more to deal with in the world that IS here NOW

    why cant we teach both? Christians are perhaps pissed that evolution takes a chapter in a science text book to teach and creationism is, “oh the other theory is that God made it all”.

  6. RCR

    “No one should be mocked for his or her beliefs on a subject that NO ONE has the ?right? answer to.”

    “why cant we teach both?”

    Because we DO have the right answer. Evolution happened. It IS happening. All reputable scientists will tell you that – we shouldn’t teach our kids the opposite of what WE KNOW simply because a few crackpot scientists have decided to frame religion in terms of “science.” But it’s not science. There’s nothing scientific about it. The scientists who are supporting this “theory” (bullshit) aren’t even biologists.

    ID is not an alternative theory any more than Scientology is an alternative to Christianity. It’s bogus. Whether you believe in God or not, we know FOR A FACT that man did not simply appear on earth 3000 years ago.

    If you want to teach ID, then you should also be force to teach the “theory” that the world is flat.

  7. new p

    i cant argue with you over what is fact and what is theory. because we’ll never agree. but the bottom line is they CANT prove evolution in the same black and white way they can prove that the world is round. and when you consider the scientific method, Evolution is not considered to be scientific fact. although i agree that most facts point in that direction.

    if we are going on what a majority of scientists believe to be the case then why not also inform students about what a majority of people believe to be the case? it is not analygous to teaching that the world is flat because THAT has been proven false.

    it is similar to teaching that different groups of people believe different things. here is what this group believes and why, and here is what this group believes and why. when the facts point toward evolution they speak for themselves. there is no harm in teaching that ANOTHER theory is out there and is extremely popular – its just information. they’re not teaching that God DID create the world.

  8. LaLa

    RCR, last time I checked, no one has answered the question of WHERE did the original matter/energy come from to create the Big Bang?

    I’m not saying I don’t believe in evolution and science. But the exact nature of the formation of Nature IS NOT known. And if you can prove it and quantify it and write a textbook about it, let me be the first to congratulate you. Because you’re about to be a bajilionaire!

  9. RCR

    “if we are going on what a majority of scientists believe to be the case then why not also inform students about what a majority of people believe to be the case?”

    Populist science? Really? I mean really? How about we leave it up to the people who have devoted their entire LIVES to studying it to inform the students. Let’s not let the ignorance of the american public perpetuate itself. ID is not science. It should not be taught in a science class.

    It’s not just information; it’s misinformation.

    “Science also relies on facts, which are either data gathered through observation or instances in which some phenomenon has been tested and verified so many times that there is no longer good reason to suspect any variation in outcome. Even in this case a fact is not immutable, since it is always possible for new evidence to be introduced that will overturn a long-established fact. Evolution is a fact in the respect that we have hard data ? an ever-expanding fossil record ? proving that species have changed over time; dinosaurs, early mammals, Trilobites, and other forms no longer exist as living species. The exact mechanism by which these changes occurred (e.g. natural selection and environmental pressures) is the realm of evolutionary theory and is based on interpretation of that fossil record and other available data.

    The ?Intelligent Design? movement is not a monolithic group; it is composed of numerous Creationist organizations with varying agendas and specific beliefs. However, the basic tenet of ID can be summarized by the statement life is very complex; such complexity could not have been arrived at by chance, therefore an intelligent designer must exist. This is not a theory in the scientific sense; at best it’s the hypothesis or thesis statement in an analytical paper and must be supported by massive amounts of confirmatory data in order to be considered proven in any real sense. Even if the initial researcher provided such evidence, his or her findings still must be confirmed and re-tested by others in order to eliminate experimental error or other problems.

    However, most of ID’s proofs consist of statements such as “see how complex the human mind is? This could not have happened by chance, and that proves our point.” This isn’t proof. Instead, it’s circular reasoning using the central tenet complex life could not have been arrived at by chance as its core: having accepted that statement, anything deemed ?complex? must have originated with the proposed intelligent designer. ID proponents offer no actual proof that chance cannot be responsible for complexity; they simply assert that this is the case.”

  10. RCR

    Lala,

    The is a great dispute among credible astrophysicists re: how the universe began. It is far from settled.

    To the contrary, there is NO dispute among credible biologists regarding evolution.

  11. Aja

    FSM’s heaven sounds fun. Who were the guys with the Nikes and sweat suits that killed themselves because of the comet? What was their deal?

  12. The Senator

    Please fake Senator if you are going to use my moniker at least use my link. Gosh darnet. But I do agree with the Senator’s comments. He is actually thinking what i’m thinking.

  13. Phil

    Why do people assume that God did not create via evolution(if they believe in God)? Or that He didn’t/wouldn’t create the universe via the “Big Bang”?

    People point to the “6 days”, but it also says in the Bible to God “a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like a day”.

  14. DCB Post author

    Yeah humans evolved in exactly 6,000 years. What a beautifully round number.. it would add strength to the intelligent design “theory” even further. Good job cracking the case. :thumbup:

  15. Phil

    Did I say “6,000 years”? It’s a metaphor, by people who wrote the Bible thousands of years ago. Just pointing out that even the hardline creationists who say “6 days means 6 days” doesn’t mean that, if you DO believe in God (I’m guessing maybe you don’t?), doesn’t necessarily mean He couldn’t have created man via evolution (yes, over millions of years).

    Good job having an open mind.

  16. fanman

    “In the final analysis, the biochemical hypothesis of intelligent design fails not because the scientific community is closed to it but rather for the most basic of reasons — because it is overwhelmingly contradicted by the scientific evidence.” -Dr. Ken Miller (from the Natural History Magazine report on Intelligent Design)

Comments are closed.