Intelligent Design

16 posts / 0 new
Last post
ronald bertram's picture
Intelligent Design

Creationist subscribe to the concept that life was created by a God. An eternal being that is omnipotent and all knowing. Thus, a being capable of creating all life would logically be "intelligent". This is the derivation of the concept of "intelligent design".

Parasites are highly evolved and highly specialized organisms. Anyone who has ever taken parasitology knows how astonishing some parasites are. However, true parasitism as defined in the biological sciences offers nothing of value to the natural biological realm. That doesn't cause a biologist any grief because evolution follows a path in accordance with the natural realm. The Universe has no conscience. But why would a God create parasites? Creationist have a hard time with that question. Some Christians will say it is because God wanted to punish man as a result of the debacle in the Garden of Eden when Eve ate the forbidden fruit. But why punish the entire living community? Foxes, bovines, cats, monkeys, rodents, etc?

Creationist just don't have a good explanation for the origins of parasitism because it cannot be explained by intelligent design.

Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

David Killens's picture
@Bright Raven

@Bright Raven

I get it, you have this morbid "thing" for parasites. Why did you create this second thread when your previous thread was discussing parasites?

ronald bertram's picture
@David Killens

@David Killens

I have always enjoyed the study of parasites. Some of the life cycles would put the best horror movie to shame. Maybe sometime I will pick one of my favorites and describe it.

I posted this because the pun used in the other thread didn't seem to get the message across.

David Killens's picture
@ Bright Raven

@ Bright Raven

Thank you for the response.

But creationists will make up whatever kind of shit to "explain" something, such as "god is testing is", or "god is making us stronger".

ronald bertram's picture
@David Killens

@David Killens

Acknowledged. But I don't let it frustrate me. Creationist don't follow the scientific method so they are notorious for making it up as they go.

boomer47's picture
@BrightRaven

@BrightRaven

I've accepted evolution since I was 12. Even read 'The Voyage Of The Beagle' when I was in my early 20's.

I have long thought that nature/evolution is a rotten engineer.'Good enough' really is good enough. A thing only needs to work, it doesn't need to be elegant.

I think I heard this from Stephen Fry, but am not sure. Consequently, it needs to be considered anecdotal. That there is an insect which defecates through its mouth.

ronald bertram's picture
Yep. You got it right!

@Cranky47

You got it right! Evolution is not guided by a team of quality control experts.

David Killens's picture
Creationists make up shit on

Creationists make up shit on the fly. When the topic of dinosaurs and the Ark came around, they stated that just baby dinosaurs were in it. Every time they run up against a logical fallacy, they make up more shit.

ronald bertram's picture
I am a biologist by education

I am a biologist by education and career experience, now retired and breeding registered Simmental cattle as a hobby. In my experience when their statements and assertions are illogical, unreasonable or simply don't pass the laugh test, it is best to just remain mute and not give any validity to hogwash.

Sheldon's picture
I agree parasites and

I agree parasites and symbiotic organisms are fascinating, and of course are a sound rational reason to dismiss the idea an omniscient benevolent deity designed and created everything.

Though I'd have to disagree about so called intelligent design being inferred from the erroneous idea that complex living things require an intelligent creator. So called intelligent design is merely a propaganda repackaging of creationism, in a very unsubtle attempt to falsely imply it has some rational basis, or even lie that it has some scientific support. What was the name of that idiot creationist always touted as a scientific expert, Dr something Morris I think. The usual creationist propaganda lies were assigned to him, the now debunked myth of irreducible complexity, the assumption of design being necessary to explain complexity in living organisms etc etc...then when you googled this Moron you found out he had no qualification in biology at all, his PhD is in engineering ffs, fucking hilarious, and that's before you pointed out to the creatards repeating his guff, that his claims were entirely at odds with the entire global scientific consensus, and nothing he claimed about evolution has ever been supported by peer reviewed research or evidence.

Then theists usually make a sweeping claim that many scientists reject the fact of species evolution. Of course when you project Steve their ass, you then find out none of those so called scientists, are even qualified in the relevant fields of study.

Creationists are funny, you have to give them that.

elphidium55's picture
Pehaps we could think of the

Pehaps we could think of the question of parasites as a special case of the more general question of the theological meaning of predation. On naturalism, predation is not difficult to explain: it is just another biological niche that organism have expanded into (probably multiple times).

On the classical, Christian view, predation was brought about by "the fall." But does this make sense?

For example, the cat "kind" that creationsts believe was aboard the ark is portrayed as being a carnivore. This fact seems to entail one of the following:

(1) God created the cat "kind" with all it's predatory features intact -- sort of a carnivore in waiting. This proto-cat had all the adaptions for the predatory life-style which it did not live and no adaptions for the niche it did occupy (ie. as an herbivore). In other words, the cat kinds' survival was the result of an ongoing, continuous miracle.

Or (2) the "pre-fall" proto-cat kind had none of the predatory adaptions we see today. Which means that the fall somehow "triggered" God to choose to radically transform the grass eating cat into the meat eating cat.

But this goes way beyond any natural consequences stemming from Adam and Eve's disobedience. It's almost as if God had set up Eden like a row of dominoes such that Afam and Eve's "mistake" was pre-enginereed to bring the whole thing down.

ronald bertram's picture
@Elphidium-55

@Elphidium-55

I am on the same page.

The concept that the "the fall" caused God to "redesign" his creation is wrought with flaws. The fall itself was a stacked deck.

Also, if there were a God with the capacity to create a Universe, why would he even employ the mechanism of devouring any living creation as a source of nourishment? If a being were that capable, the being could have created units that survive without the requirement of nourishment.

There is no end to these types of conundrums. It really doesn't pass a laugh test.

Edited to add:

The classical Christian concept is that the "original creation" was an utopia and was "redesigned" to the harsh natural environment that it is because Adam and Eve partook of the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. This can lead to an endless list of reasonable, logical questions:

1. Were Adam and Eve flawed?
2. Was the punishment just?
3. Why would a being create such a "jury rigged" setup?
4. Why were all the components of the "utopia" punished for the crimes of the human component?
Etc, etc, etc.

The answer: God works in mysterious ways. Lol

A better answer is that the whole concept is a fairytale.

Whitefire13's picture
I prefer “Pandora’s Box” when

I prefer “Pandora’s Box” when it comes to explaining the world’s “condition”

Sheldon's picture
Whitefire13 "I prefer

Whitefire13 "I prefer “Pandora’s Box” when it comes to explaining the world’s “condition”

For the time being one species of evolved ape is pretty much in charge, and whilst I see the irony, the results surely must be fairly predictable. The notion of sin as an explanation is risible by comparison, as an explanation of human frailties and flaws, and the fall is not just fatuous myth, it is roundly contradicted by masses of objective evidence. We evolved for a start, as did all living things, the myth itself of course cannot get even the most basic facts right, like the chronology of the formation of our solar system or the origin of the universe. Genetics has now shown unequivocally that the human genome could never have been derived from a population of just 2 humans, indeed the smallest bottleneck would have had to be vastly higher.

Most damning of all is that it is not supported a shred of objective evidence, or any rational argument. No, unexplained magic is no answer to anything.

Whitefire13's picture
@Sheldon....re: “No,

@Sheldon....re: “No, unexplained magic is no answer to anything.”

Whaaaatttttt?????? Genetics blahhh blahhh blahhh. Bottle-neck blahhh blahhh blahhhh ...I agree about the whole Adam/eve thing - I’m talking Pandora’s Box!

Now I understand the “confusion” - don’t eat from the tree (ate from the tree) - don’t open the box (opened the box)

The box let out all the bad spirits (you know, the ones Johan talked about) and THEY cause all the world’s troubles.

Jesus, I didn’t even go into “where did Pandora come from” - dumbass ;)

dogalmighty's picture
...and how is god intelligent

...and how is god intelligent? LOL.

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.