How can anyone believe in Intelligent design when large portions of the human population are stupid ?
Posted by James on August 30, 2010 · 19 Comments
Question by Plato: How can anyone believe in Intelligent design when large portions of the human population are stupid ?
Best answer:
Answer by ATHEIST
its unfortunate isnt it
Give your answer to this question below!
Its usually that portion of the population who also believes in it.
Maybe its just some type of wishful thinking 😀
Cause the ones that believe it are the stupid ones you just talked about.
Boggles the mind, doesn’t it?
Isn’t that a bit like saying that cars can’t be intelligently designed because they break down all the time?
I believe in the theory of stupid design.
Any good design can become stupid when it’s corrupted.
Yes but it’s easy to tell the difference, they label themselves. Steer clear of the religious ones.
If we are intelligently designed by God, I’d hate to think what his idea of a stupid design was.
Stupid is a choice.
The things of God are “Foolish ” to those that are outside the Covenant:
yes intelligent design is evident
people are not stupid
only those who think they are better use that judgment because some one disagrees with their views
The number one problem with your question is that large portions of the human population are NOT stupid. Some are ignorant of certain things, others mislead, but those things in and of themselves do not constitute stupidity.
Number 2 problem is that just because the designer was intelligent doesn’t mean that He would have designed us all to be geniuses.
Male genitalia pretty much make the case for non-intelligence and lack of design.
Intelligent designer fail, that’s how.
God did not “design” us.. he created us, and we design ourselves..sometimes as stupid.. when we say stupid things and make stupid choices. good luck to you.
Yes that is part of the problem. The other is the human mind. It can accept things that are not true.
Are you perhaps overlooking the fact that those very same “portions of the human population” are exactly those who espouse the ludicrous and demonstroably fallacious idea of Intelligent Design? You are not exactly “preaching to the choir,” but you are seeminly asking the choir to convince the rest of us how perfectly pitched their singing is….
Selection bias. They see things from a certain viewpoint, and fail to examine anything in the larger context.
They look at the human eye and see “inspired design” but forget about all those people born blind, or whose eyes don’t work quite properly (nearsighted, farsighted, cataracts, etc..).
They also forget all the possible types of vision we don’t have, infrared, ultraviolet, X-rays, Gamma Rays, Radio, all those other parts of the electromagnetic spectrum alongside what we egotistically call the visible spectrum.
They see the earth, in just the right orbit, with just the right atmosphere, and fail to realize that life adapted to Earth, Earth wasn’t built for life.
And they also fail to see how incredibly vast and inhospitable the universe really is. When you build a house, it’s hardly good design if 99.99999999% of the house is lethal to whoever you’ve built it for.
It’s like someone sitting on a corner all day, watching a traffic light, and randomly saying the word green. Every so often, the person will say Green, and the light will turn green. Even though the light doesn’t change for or because of him, at the end of the day, he’s only going to remember the times he said it and it changed.
It’s why people think prayer works too, they remember all the times it “worked” ignore and forget all the times it failed.
The better question would be:
How can anybody believe that the universe, Earth, and life have an intelligent designer when there are birth defects, auto-immune disorders, chronic back pain from bipedality, allergies, miscarriage, a shared feeding and breathing tube entrance leading to the chance of choking, cancer, conjoined twins, inefficient metabolisms as compared to Orangutans and many other animals and a myriad of other imperfections of design that are perfectly explained as preservation of ancestral traits that served a different purpose or random advantageous mutations?