Quote:

---

randomness is a pervasive, persistent, and ultimately dominant trend (otherwise known as entropy).

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Like trying to see the nose on a chicken, so to speak.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SergeantX:
The arguments for ID are compelling for many, but, if anything, the evidence points to "Stupid Design".

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Atomkey:
Not only that, but the results are the same for ANY scale, be it a basketball, baseball, ping pong ball, molecule, protein, atom, electron, quark, and even further.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Atomkey:
One seeks the others potential so the electrons may complete a circuit and allow the flow to realize itself?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
There is plenty of evidence that life forms adapt to their environment, but very little evidence of a life form transforming into something else as a result of environmental pressures.

---

Quote:

---

There is plenty of evidence that life forms adapt to their environment, but very little evidence of a life form transforming into something else as a result of environmental pressures.

---

Quote:

---

There is mathematics that suggests that the probability of life occurring with the complexity that we observe is astronomically small.

---

Quote:

---

originally posted by AtomKey:
But where did all the stuff come from in the first place? Did it make itself? Did you make yourself? A subatomic particle has a particular vector and velocity. These cannot be known until measured, right? So then when they are measured they are proven to have a particular course and speed. Take a wave-guide that has one injection site and two paths. The observed path is always where the particle emerges. Is this random? Perhaps random is just a cop-out way of saying we have no method to predict the outcome – yet. Maybe there is no random after all?

---

Quote:

---

originally posted by AnthonyT:
The fact that not all creatures who are exposed to similar experiences end up evolving in the same way suggests to me that the course of evolution itself is guided by an underlying intelligent design or plan.

---

Quote:

---

The fact that not all creatures who are exposed to similar experiences end up evolving in the same way suggests to me that the course of evolution itself is guided by an underlying intelligent design or plan....the One who made it possible for randomness to change us in beneficial ways.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:
Even if the creatures and their situations are similar I doesn't necessarilly follow that the same mutation would be optimal. In fact I would argue the fact that not all creatures evolve in the same way is more coherent with a 'random' element to evolution than a designed.

---

Quote:

---

In fact modern thinking is that an electron does not orbit an atom, but forms an electron cloud around it because it can literally exist in all places within its orbit at once.

---

Quote:

---

http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/

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.

Positive evidence of design in living systems consists of the semantic, meaningful or functional nature of biological information, the lack of any known law that can explain the sequence of symbols that carry the "messages," and statistical and experimental evidence that tends to rule out chance as a plausible explanation. Other evidence challenges the adequacy of natural or material causes to explain both the origin and diversity of life.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SergeantX:
It seems to me, for a religion to have much value it ought to be flexible and adaptive (much like science is).

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:
Oh, and any intelligent design would incorporate randomness as a factor, thus ordering random chaos into its overall pattern.

---

Quote:

---

If the gravitational constant was either higher or lower by just a FEW percent then either the universe would have been composed of massive stars that would have quickly burned out (higher)...

---

Quote:

---

The Copernican Principle holds that since our universe exists, and since we have no good reason to think that it is special, we have to assume that it is simply the most likely of all possible universes - in short, mediocre.

---

Quote:

---

Weak anthropic principle (WAP): "The observed values of all physical and cosmological quantities are not equally probable but they take on values restricted by the requirement that there exist sites where carbon-based life can evolve and by the requirements that the Universe be old enough for it to have already done so."
Strong anthropic principle (SAP): "The Universe must have those properties which allow life to develop within it at some stage in its history."
Final anthropic principle (FAP): "Intelligent information-processing must come into existence in the Universe, and, once it comes into existence, it will never die out."

---

Quote:

---

Well, so we say NOW! Just wait another several billion years and we'll be cryn' the blues THEN! I'm just sayin' that we had better find our purpose for creation because we're on a timetable, gorramit!

---