Not at all. Most experiments are mess.
2 Likes
I only considered an experiment a success if it generated publishable data.
5 Likes
Naw. It’s just like cooking. You’re only left with a mess if you don’t clean up after yourself as you work. The phrase you’re looking for is “a steaming pile”, or “the dog’s breakfast”.
1 Like
I fail to see how atheism pertains to my comment. I’m pretty sure Joshua shares my sentiments, and he is no atheist.
3 Likes
You do realize that all ID proponents are not “creationists”. You only single out creationists in your comment.
1 Like
Do you know any IDists that do not think the designer is God? What do you have against creationists any ways? I believe God created us too.
1 Like
Yes, one that comes to mind is Dennis Jones who moderates ID official FB page who is an Athiest and ID supporter.
So who does he think is the designer?
1 Like
Here is his webpage on ID. https://dennisdjones.wordpress.com/
Most arguments are a mess. 
Random mutation has a specific meaning within evolutionary biology. It is “random” with respect to something else, that “something else” being something like “fitness” or “need.”
How often mutations occur is irrelevant to whether or not they are “random” in the sense that “random mutation” is used within evolutionary biology.
But then, I am only someone posting anonymously. Not at all like T_aquaticus.
1 Like
Well, that sure is an unadulterated pile of weapons grade stupidity. Exactly what point were you trying to make by posting that?
1 Like
You think the designer is God. Do you know of any Christian who does not think that the designer is God?
Michael Denton and David Berlinski come to mind as IDists who may not think that the designer is God.
1 Like
This site has been inactive for nearly four years.
I’d still like to see an answer to @swamidass’s question. Does he ever offer one?
Well, if not God, who do they propose the designer is?
Ok, well you can contact him on Facebook as again he is the head moderator for ID official FB page.
What for?
Okay @Lou, let us grant that there is a guy some where that no one knows much about that did some nice things for ID, and might not think God is the designer. Perhaps he appeals to magical aliens in another dimension. Or perhaps he doesn’t personally believe in ID and and is pranking people. Or maybe he is sock-puppet. Who knows?
How many ID supporters are out there that do think the designer is good? Let us suppose that 99.999% think the designer is God. Seems like a pretty safe bet to call them creationists making ID arguments. And why would that be a problem? I believe that God created all things too. It isn’t an insult. It isn’t the reason why scientists reject their arguments. Why does it matter?
My initial comment I thought I was replying directly to person with anti Creationist Atheist in their title who made comment about creationists. I was simply pointing out there are non religious people who support ID with an example. The person made it sound as though creationists just follow along blindly and can’t think for themselves. They then go onto say “Not sure what can be done about it”.
You have to agree that some creationists are following along blindly here, and are not thinking for themselves. This does not mean all ID proponents are following along blindly. It does not mean all creationists are blindly following. It just means that some of them are. In context, @Faizal_Ali was saying that gives @Agauger a responsibility to be clear with them.
This is not about promoting atheism, but about not misleading people about science.
Why would any one object to that?