Sentences with phrase «by intelligent design»

By intelligent design, data is filtered down so that the conscious mind focuses on only 7 to 40 bits.

A lifelong observer of, and participant in, the creation - evolution controversy, I was struck by how clear the solution is in these islands: creation by intelligent design is absurd.

His ideas opened a type of path not opened by intelligent design: methodically challenging the initial base of ideas and refining it until it becomes something far more specific and useful.

In a commentary published Monday 11 September, Leshner said that efforts by intelligent design advocates to promote «critical analysis» of evolution and other controversial science issues put Ohio's economy and the future of its children at risk.

«But critical analysis, as a slogan embraced by the intelligent design movement, turns the scientific method upside - down,» he said.

Even the the so - called «god particle» was created by intelligent design.

Yes, I am interested in and frequently write about the theological and cultural implications of Darwinism's imminent demise and replacement by intelligent design.

On the other hand, Calvin offers what is probably a better account of the role actually played by intelligent design among its advocates.

The current dialogue between religion and science seems to be dominated by the intelligent design (ID) controversy.

Aline, that's because the Earth wasn't created by intelligent design.

When Romulan warbirds fire disruptors and humans can only defend themselves with wooden shield with holy cross markings, you can tell me Romulan conquest of Earth is by intelligent design.

Not exact matches

ID states that an intelligent being (presumed God) bypasses evolution by providing pre-made (designed) parts.

It is possible to take a different view of intelligent design and believe that life on Earth was created and guided by a previously naturally evolved species that was advanced enough 4 billion years ago to have helped life on Earth get to where it is today.

My belief tells me that random chance is terribly inefficient and yes, unlikely, and we are a product of intelligent design and not by some accident that started in a puddle of goop.

Intelligent design is a conviction that life is too complex to have developed solely through evolution and that the universe was designed by an intelligent entity.

Proves to me intelligent design by a Creator we call GOD.

British chemist Leslie Orgel once said, «Evolution is smarter than you are,» to which atheist Christopher Hitchens responded, «But this complement to the «intelligence» of natural selection is not by any means a concession to the stupid notion of «intelligent design.

And by the way, for the intelligent design crowd, how, exactly, do you DARE to disbelieve tbe evidence that was «obviously» «crafted» with such care to make the universe look like it's 13 billion years old?

If this guy has scientific evidence of intelligent design that can be validated by other scientists, that would be really exciting.

EG: Ridiculing science and forcing creationism on school children by calling it «intelligent design».

Why do you think the «christians» are trying so blasted hard to ruin school systems here in the states by making them teach «intelligent design» and «abstinence only»?

The wedge strategy is a political and social action plan authored by the Discovery Insti - tute, the hub of the intelligent design movement.

According to a news release from the University of Akron, the researchers who uncovered this wonder of nature «are already working toward developing a synthetic adhesive that mimics this intelligent design strategy employed by the house spider.»

Nearly every scientific society, representing hundreds of thousands of scientists, have issued statements rejecting intelligent design and a peti.tion supporting the teaching of evolutionary biology was endorsed by 72 US Nobel Prize winners.

Whether or not God tinkered with creation in the manner envisioned by creationism or some versions of intelligent design, such tinkering is neither necessary to the doctrine of creation nor is it the source of the beauty seen by the believer.

Advocates of intelligent design claim that anyone can be led to belief in an intelligent designer by a scientific study of nature.

Design by an intelligent being Happened by random chance What are the differences between the two creators?

You, on the other hand, have already assumed that intelligent design, which is a term coined and invented by man (as is god), is how we and the universe evolved.

But in fact, intelligent design is mainly advocated in America by conservative Christians, who regard the account of creation in the opening chapters of Genesis as a scientific description of the origin of the world.

An «intelligent design» curriculum based on the very premise that «intelligent design» is logic - based and not entirely «faith - based could never be accepted by those who want to teach «intelligent design» in our schools because logic compels:

With all the evidence, religious people ought to be intelligent design (I mean god - guided evolution by this) supporters at worst, though I would hope that after some serious thoughts on the moral paradoxes induced by belief in the «divine» people would come to their senses.

Is it more rational to believe the intricate design and incomprehensibly balanced fine tuning of our universe happened by chance, or that an intelligent agent designed it for a purpose?

However, there is abundant evidence that the universe was designed by super intelligent Agent, who purposed that the universe should exist and be capable of supporting advanced life.

I myself am not a member of the intelligent design community, because I'm too influenced by Walker Percy's view concerning the «discontinuity» between members of our species and the rest of nature.

It is precisely this outdated theology of natural or «intelligent» design that is the target of the simplistic attacks on religion by new atheist writers.

They claim that scientific theories that ascribe the great role to chance and random events in the evolutionary processes should be replaced, or supplemented, by theories acknowledging the thread of intelligent design in the universe.

derp, I'm wondering if you have read the book by Dr. Stephen Myers called «Signature in the Cell» which argues that specifically encoded DNA strands store information in a precise and logical manner which provides some evidence that an argument for intelligent design is present?

As Johnson has clearly stated, biology informed by the recognition of intelligent design is «theism «friendly» in a way that doctrinaire naturalism is not.

Anyway no reference to a creator or intelligent design was made as scientists are not allowed to be associated with anyone who believes in an agent of causation that exhibits properties that can not be fully explained by known natural laws.

He sits around forever, gets bored, makes a species, and then punishes the crap out of them for only doing what comes naturally by his «intelligent design».

This is made clear by the definition of its very proponents: «the theory of intelligent design (ID) holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection.

It is unfortunately true that, contrary to his intention, that newspaper article has been understood by many in the US to be directly supportive of the so - called «intelligent design» hypothesis, which invokes divine design through the detection of instances of supposedly irreducible complexity (i.e. un-evolvable organisms).

'' «there are no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system occurred»» Michael Behe.

Even the «simplest» life form gives ample evidence of DESIGN - INTELLIGENT DESIGN by someone much much GREATER than man ever will be-ALMIGHTY GOD.

There seems to be a consensus among the evolutionary creationists that the intelligent design folks have not provided sufficient data to support their claims and are therefore not taken seriously by the scientific community.

By assuming the inevitability of intelligent aliens, Gingerich explains, «they accept the existence of design principles that make life resembling our own a natural feature of the cosmos.»

Haught frequently criticizes the intelligent - design movement championed by Michael Behe and Philip Johnson, but does not engage with the movement through extended argument.

Is it possible for either of them to come about by mere chance, without intelligent design?

Again, the «designs» are neither intelligent nor do they stand out as truly unique in the context of those which came before and those that have come since, rather they all fall along a continuum predicted by evolution.

For example, mathematician William A. Dembski wrote that the «intelligent design» evident in «observable features of the natural world... can be adequately explained only by recourse to intelligent causes.»