Atheists: What is your favorite stupid “intelligent design” argument?
Posted by James on July 19, 2011 · 13 Comments
Question by Blasphemy is fun!: Atheists: What is your favorite stupid “intelligent design” argument?
I personally like “Irreducible Complexity” because it is just so easy to mathematically disprove.
A
(A&&B)
(A||B)<
Answer by Ark
Age of the Earth
What do you think? Answer below!
The origin of Coke theory.
Well I dont have a favorite, but the two that stick out the most is the argument that the banana disproves evolution. And the argument that sealed peanut butter disproves evolution.
Those show that human ignorance has no limits
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AqpfaFcEzh_eDWckr1RqfVrty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20081202164911AAZnTAa&show=7#profile-info-WbaN6osZaa
Atheism doesn’t exactly decide that you follow intelligent design. I’m atheist, and I prefer the idea of natural selection, makes more sense to me.
That there is some feature of DNA (maybe a tiny little stop sign at a crossroad on the double helix?) that keeps micro evolution and macro evolution separate.
Accurate, but not the best way to explain it!
The best thing about Irreducible Complexity is it’s a concept that you can always prove whatever example a creationist uses, because in order to ‘design’ something complex, the designer must be more complex. If the argument is something is too complex to NOT be designed, then ergo God must be more complex than it, hance requiring a designer of His own.
But personal favourite? Eyeballs, and the bacterial flagellar motor.
That patterns show there must be a designer. When there are so many random simulacra. We are the intelligence, we see the design.
Denton (1986) has pointed out that the biochemical “relatedness” between various plants and animals is not what one would expect in a scheme of descent from a common ancestor. Instead, plants or animals in one large biological grouping appear to be equidistant from those in any other group, in spite of varying physical differences among themselves. For instance, the difference between the cytochrome C protein of a bacterium and any higher organism is essentially the same, whether the other organism be yeast, wheat, silk moth, tuna, pigeon or horse. Similarly, using this or other proteins, the difference between insects and vertebrates is the same, as though no one vertebrate is more closely related to invertebrates than another.
Definitely the Banana argument, and the ‘Just look around you! That didn’t come around by CHANCE!’
My personal favorite is the “I NO GOD MADE TEH ERTH AND HUMONS THRU ADAM AND EVE BECAUZE THATS WHAT THE BIBLE SAYZ!” argument. We rarely see this argument these days. I would like to believe it’s because Christians are getting smarter.
Though not necessarily ID but Ray Comfort and the banana fiasco has to be my all time fave, closely followed by Hovind and his claims regarding Sirius.
IF WE EVOLVED FROM MONKEYS THEN WHY ARE MONKEYS STILL AROUND?!?!?!
You have to use all cap locks to make it as effective.
I love when they say that they know God exists because he saved them from some car crash or something and they came out un-scathed or how before they had no faith. So millions are starving, kids are being born right now with AIDS and some woman is being thrown into jail because SHE was raped but God couldn’t help anyone of these people because he was so busy saving you from a car wreck?