Evolution Message Board - Msg: 26522102

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: LLCF who wrote (4598)	5/8/2010 7:12:30 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) of 69300

The only argument I would know among any scientist would be how you define "intelligence" or "mind"... Then you'd be wrong. U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III (Kitzmiller) ruled that intelligent design is not science and is a religious and creationist position. The National Academy of Sciences says it isn't scientific. The U.S. National Science Teachers Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have termed it pseudoscience. That makes you a fundamentalist wacko. -------------------------------------------------------- For example... DO YOU THINK an amoeba has a "mind"? This goes back about 3 years years on this thread with TigerPaw... words like "Mind", "intelligence", "intention", "thinking, etc. etc. all need defining. I took basic Cell Bio a few years ago @ a very mainstream university and there was no doubt that the mechanisms of cells are non-random and "intelligent" with quotes. I'd accept that cells show "intelligent" movement and mechanisms, speaking very broadly. They're made that way. I don't thats important though, the bigger issue is how they got that way.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next