Intelligent Design Used to “Prove” Darwinism
Using significant intelligent manipulation, scientists have managed to make caterpillars change colors:
Scientists Force Evolution in the Lab
Loved this quote toward the end of the article: None of this looks to be going anywhere in the sense of survival of the fittest. The black and green caterpillars will all grow up basically the same. Well, congrats; under very controlled conditions and with intelligent folks running the show, the scientists have managed to make a caterpillar do something that they’d never seen before. Hey, that design there, that’s intelligent!
This phrase comes from the 1978 "Jonestown massacre" in which most members of the Peoples Temple cult, blindly following their leader Jim Jones, committed suicide by drinking cyanide-laced Kool-Aid.
Osborne: A Contrarian's Guide to Knowing God
Schlossberg: Idols For Destruction
2 Responses to “Intelligent Design Used to “Prove” Darwinism”
Regardless of whether humanity truly evolved from blobs of jelly and monkeys, Creationists cannot prevail in the ongoing debate about our origins. Their position is fatally flawed. You see, the Creationist position fundamentally relies upon the premise that the Judeo-Christian Bible is the Word of God. If it’s not; if the Bible is just a book, then there is no Creationist position. Recently, a lawyer embarked upon a mission to become the greatest Christian on the planet. In his quest he made a profound discovery. He discovered that the Bible is unequivocally not the Word of God. His argument is compelling. After reading his thesis, I am both shocked and embarrassed that I spent my whole life as a Christian and a Creationist. And while his thesis does not invalidate the so-called theory of “Intelligent Design,†it absolutely dismantles the theory of Biblical Creationism. You can read his Thesis at http://www.InDefenseOfGod.com/
Gil Stone ~ Feb 8, 2006 at 11:29 pm
Except that there is no single theory of Biblical Creationism, but rather an ongoing conversation that includes several different conclusions as to interpretation. You’re certainly right, Gil; Biblical Creationism does rely on the Bible as the inerrant Word, and I’m sticking with that Bible, while being a bit unsure of certain specifics as to timing of creation, etc.
Byron ~ Feb 11, 2006 at 3:13 pm