Anthropomorphic Design

15 posts / 0 new
Last post
chimp3's picture
The scientific method is an

The scientific method is an invention of the human mind . It does help us to overcome the limitations of our senses and limited brain function. The same as a lever and fulcrum help us overcome the limitations of our muscles.
I do not think religious people are the only human who anthropomorphize. I do think Intelligent design is an anthropomorphic projection.
How do I prove this? It is an opinion not a scientific claim. This thread is an op-ed piece not a thesis.

devout christian's picture
I as an agnostic say that you

I as an agnostic say that you don`t know and science or philosophy doesn`t know if there is intelligent design, you are making a dogmatic assertion that has no credence to it.We just don`t know, So say that , instead of your misleading post.

Nyarlathotep's picture
simply agnostic - I as an

simply agnostic - I as an agnostic say

Are you going to take your medication today; or will you be an atheist (or Christian) again tomorrow?

chimp3's picture
There is no intelligent

There is no intelligent design in evolution. Random mutation and selection for fitness. That is all. Evolution is not planning for the future . Hence, Dawkins calls the process "the Blind Watchmaker".

devout christian's picture
by you personally attacking

by you personally attacking me you don`t further the conversation any. Stick with the subject at hand, I was a Christian until recently leaving the faith. I find more arguments against god`s existence then for his existence.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Let's be clear, according to

Let's be clear, according to your posts you were an atheist, then a Christian, then a non-Christian, then a Christian again, now a non-Christian again; all the the matter of a few weeks. I suppose it isn't any of my business; and perhaps I went a little far, but it does seem rather odd. Just my two bits. For what it is worth I'm glad you are where you currently are.

chimp3's picture
The Scopes Trial is over

The Scopes Trial is over people. So is the Iron Age. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming.

ProfMdTwist's picture
Great points. People are

Great points. People are generally stupid, and even the smart ones tend to be ignorant and unwilling to learn anything that is outside their comfort zone. Even though much of the gaps have been filled with proven scientific knowledge, they keep trying to reinsert God like a peg in a square hole.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Anyway; I thought I'd post a

Anyway; I thought I'd post a snippet (10 mins) from a famous Feynman lecture, where he discusses this prediction/observation business:

Greensnake's picture
Nyarlathotep:

Nyarlathotep:

Couldn't pass up a Feynman lecture, and the icing on the cake is the subject that you found! Thanks!

The Pragmatic's picture
One of the best things I've

One of the best things I've ever seen! :)
Thanks for posting it!

Nyarlathotep's picture
Like how you did with

valiya s sajjad - Like how you did with ‘missing links’

The "missing link" was never a prediction of evolution. In fact, the idea pre-dates evolution:

Transitional_fossil:Missing_links - The term "missing link" refers back to the originally static pre-evolutionary concept of the great chain of being, a deist idea that all existence is linked, from the lowest dirt, through the living kingdoms to angels and finally to God.

valiya s sajjad - We belong to branches of evolution that are so far apart that our common ancestor should have been some extremely primitive organism. We branch out from there and yet end up with the same organ, so complex as the eye.

It is funny that the whole conversation about the octopus eye VS the human eye revolves around how they are not the same organ; but that totally went over your head didn't it?

Nyarlathotep's picture
If hot-air balloons are

valiya s sajjad - If hot-air balloons are rising up in defiance of the law of gravity...It can’t be just overlooked as a minor aberration.

It isn't an aberration at all of course. Newtonian gravity does not demand which why objects will move, it just assigns a force (or acceleration if you know the mass) an object will experience due to gravity. Hot air balloons experience this acceleration.

Nyarlathotep's picture
valiya s sajjad - For the

valiya s sajjad - For the lens to be functional it has to have the right thickness, curvature (convex or concave) and shape (circularity).

That is patently false. For example my wife's lenses are messed up pretty bad; but they are a hell of a lot better than no lenses!

valiya s sajjad - We never observe one species evolving into another species or new genetic information arising from mutation

valiya s sajjad - Because we know very well that even in harmful mutations - ones that destroy the organism - there is an increase in information...

Classic valiya: mutations don't add information  genetic information  new genetic information!

  1. Use a technical term, but ignore the technical definition
  2. When even this doesn't work, just spam adjectives in front of it until people pull their hair out
  3. Profit!

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.