T'ai Chi's Explanation of the uses for ID

[H3LL]

From this thread.

Originally Posted by H3LL

For TC, assuming for a moment, in some bizarre, wacky TC world where lies and deceit constitute proper scientific evidence, that ID is actually correct.

What possible, practical use does it have?

Hint: Something in medicine would be great, as ID is attempting to replace a method that produces results.

.

My breath is bated the thread baited.

We await the flood of predictions that ID can offer the scientific community and/or the explanation of useful mechanisms enabling scientists around the world to replicate results...Away you go.

[Solus]

Great idea, we can replace scientists with priests and prayer with medicine. I mean of course prayer works better then going to the doctor.

[tsg]

Originally Posted by Solus

Great idea, we can replace scientists with priests and prayer with medicine. I mean of course prayer works better then going to the doctor.

Only if you don't actually check to see if it works, though. Ya can't test god, don'tchaknow.

[KingMerv00]

Next time i lose my keys I can blame it on sprites. After all, how could they get under my couch cusions by CHANCE ALONE?

[Beleth]

Hmmm.

This is an interesting mental exercise, seeing if there are things ID would predict.

First thing that comes to mind would be that abiogenesis is impossible. If ID were true, scientists will never, ever be able to take simple chemical compounds, make complex nonliving compounds out of them, and then make complex living compounds out of those. But I don't know how much of a prediction that is, since the best you will ever be able to come to fulfilling it is to say that scientists haven't done it yet.

[Mercutio]

Originally Posted by Solus

Great idea, we can replace scientists with priests and prayer with medicine. I mean of course prayer works better then going to the doctor.

I thought we already had done so. I mean, after all the math, science, engineering and technology that went into saving the trapped miners, didn't W hold a press conference to thank people for their prayers? I figured it would be the kick-off to a new faith-based FEMA...

[Foster Zygote]

Originally Posted by Mercutio

I thought we already had done so. I mean, after all the math, science, engineering and technology that went into saving the trapped miners, didn't W hold a press conference to thank people for their prayers? I figured it would be the kick-off to a new faith-based FEMA...

I can just see the title of a new study: Is prayer more effective than incompetent management?

[CFLarsen]

Originally Posted by KingMerv00

Next time i lose my keys I can blame it on sprites. After all, how could they get under my couch cusions by CHANCE ALONE?

Cats.

Or very big cockroaches.

[JoeTheJuggler]

Originally Posted by Beleth

Hmmm.

This is an interesting mental exercise, seeing if there are things ID would predict.

First thing that comes to mind would be that abiogenesis is impossible. If ID were true, scientists will never, ever be able to take simple chemical compounds, make complex nonliving compounds out of them, and then make complex living compounds out of those. But I don't know how much of a prediction that is, since the best you will ever be able to come to fulfilling it is to say that scientists haven't done it yet.

I think that's a good candidate. At least it would answer "What does it take to falsify the 'scientific' theory of ID?"

Do you think believers would commit to this? I can see them coming up with work around explanations.

[Civilized Worm]

And would those uses for ID come anywhere close to the uses we've found for Darwinian evolution?

[ChristineR]

If ID is correct we'd expect to find some future use for all that junk and virus DNA that we've been replicating for millions of years. My own personal hope is that some of it will be seen to spell out some sort of message, like HELL YES I EXIST!

[Wowbagger]

Originally Posted by ChristineR

If ID is correct we'd expect to find some future use for all that junk and virus DNA that we've been replicating for millions of years. My own personal hope is that some of it will be seen to spell out some sort of message, like HELL YES I EXIST!

Such evidence is documented here:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=81569
(It's in the Humor section, so don't take it too seriously.)

[T'ai Chi]

Since I have so many on ignore, who will be the first non-mod to post so that I will be able to see what they write?

[T'ai Chi]

There are simply signs of intelligence to detect in the universe, like in archeology, forensics, SETI, cryptography, and some others. Wherever one can try to detect it, let's try. Let's not be limited by the limited that say 'You can study everything, except X.'

That route simply won't work.

[Mojo]

Originally Posted by T'ai Chi

Since I have so many on ignore, who will be the first non-mod to post so that I will be able to see what they write?

If you go to "Options" and set "Hide threads by Members on your Ignore List" to "yes", You won't have to worry about any threads unless they're started by you or a moderator.

I said, if you...

Oh, never mind...

[ReligionStudent]

Um, all those people that cannot get their brains around evolution could finally get those soft high school science teacher jobs.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by T'ai Chi

Since I have so many on ignore, who will be the first non-mod to post so that I will be able to see what they write?

You have all the mods on "ignore"?!?
Why the h**l do you even post here, other than to get a rise out of the new people and to see your own name over and over and over again?

On the off chance that I am one of the many he's "ignoring", could some newer poster please quote this in a post so that he could see it?
Thank you.

[clerihew80]

Tai Chi - (in case you've got Czarcasm on ignore):

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

You have all the mods on "ignore"?!?
Why the h**l do you even post here, other than to get a rise out of the new people and to see your own name over and over and over again?

On the off chance that I am one of the many he's "ignoring", could some newer poster please quote this in a post so that he could see it?
Thank you.

[H3LL]

So far TC has shown us, according to the scientific method:

Predictions (reasoning including logical deduction from hypothesis and theory):
ID will make it so that you have no option other than to ignore questioners and questions.



Two posts and two evasions so far TC........We're waiting.

.

[ReligionStudent]

In case you have clerihew80 and Czarcasm ignored Tai Chi

Quote:

Tai Chi - (in case you've got Czarcasm on ignore):

Originally Posted by Czarcasm
You have all the mods on "ignore"?!?
Why the h**l do you even post here, other than to get a rise out of the new people and to see your own name over and over and over again?

On the off chance that I am one of the many he's "ignoring", could some newer poster please quote this in a post so that he could see it?
Thank you.

[H3LL]

Originally Posted by tsg

In Signature:
In the beginning there was nothing. And the Lord said "Let There Be Light!"
And still there was nothing, but at least now you could see it.

.

[Beleth]

Originally Posted by T'ai Chi

There are simply signs of intelligence to detect in the universe, like in archeology, forensics, SETI, cryptography, and some others. Wherever one can try to detect it, let's try.

Three of those four things have something in common. Actually, they have two things in common.

1) They were made by creatures on Earth
2) They have been shown to exist.

The odd man out (SETI of course) has not produced any results. There are two potential reasons for this:

1) There is no intelligence to be found within our time-cone
2) We have misinterpreted signs of intelligence as not-signs of intelligence

A third choice, "they're hiding from us," is actually a form of the second reason.

[ReligionStudent]

Originally Posted by Beleth

Three of those four things have something in common. Actually, they have two things in common.

1) They were made by creatures on Earth
2) They have been shown to exist.

The odd man out (SETI of course) has not produced any results. There are two potential reasons for this:

1) There is no intelligence to be found within our time-cone
2) We have misinterpreted signs of intelligence as not-signs of intelligence

A third choice, "they're hiding from us," is actually a form of the second reason.

We may also have just missed some signal through SETI.

[Mobyseven]

Originally Posted by ReligionStudent

We may also have just missed some signal through SETI.

The real third option is the one T'ai Chi favours:

3) We have them on ignore.

[articulett]

Originally Posted by Solus

Great idea, we can replace scientists with priests and prayer with medicine. I mean of course prayer works better then going to the doctor.

And, so what if it didn't. It's all part of some grander plan by someone far more intelligent than us mere humans-- plus, you live forever anyhow...what's an occasional death here and there.

Death just means you start your "happily ever after" sooner, right?

[scotth]

Originally Posted by ChristineR

If ID is correct we'd expect to find some future use for all that junk and virus DNA that we've been replicating for millions of years. My own personal hope is that some of it will be seen to spell out some sort of message, like HELL YES I EXIST!

This gives me the idea to start a chain email saying something like scientists discover message from God in DNA. Discovery being suppressed. Make up some buzzword mashup of details that are deliberately self contradictory. Watch it spread like wildfire.

[Wowbagger]

Originally Posted by T'ai Chi

There are simply signs of intelligence to detect in the universe, like in archeology, forensics, SETI, cryptography, and some others. Wherever one can try to detect it, let's try. Let's not be limited by the limited that say 'You can study everything, except X.'

That route simply won't work.

One of the problems of this claim is that ID never even tries to find out anything about the nature of the Designer.
Science may not know everything about the origins of life or the universe, but we strive to find out all that we can.
That is one of the fundamental differences between science and pseudoscience: pursuit of knowledge, and testability.

Forensics - We know an awful lot about the nature of the people or things we are investigating, before we deduce what it created or not. And, if we don't know everything, we strive to find out more. Thus, it is a valid science.

Archeology - Same thing. (except with ancient artifacts that are just slightly sharpened rocks: That is often flat-out guess work.)

Cryptography – Same thing as forensics.

SETI - Different, for the very reason that we don't really know what the flark we are supposed to look for in extraterrestrial intelligence. SETI is all subjective guess work, and very little (if any) science. This is more akin to ID. But, at least they don't claim they found any intelligence at every little "funny signal" that suits their fancy. In fact, they never found anything at all, yet.

Intelligent Design - Without even trying to know the nature of the Designer, we cannot test for its existence, nor test if something was Designed by it or not. ID is subjective guesswork, not an empirical measurement, just like SETI. And, to make matters worse, their history of false-positives is rather embarrassing.

Bring us evidence of ID, and we will all change our minds. Here are some things to look for: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=81569

[T'ai Chi]

Beleth, the 4 things have something in common alright; they involve detecting intelligences.

[ReligionStudent]

Originally Posted by Wowbagger

One of the problems of this claim is that ID never even tries to find out anything about the nature of the Designer.
Science may not know everything about the origins of life or the universe, but we strive to find out all that we can.
That is one of the fundamental differences between science and pseudoscience: pursuit of knowledge, and testability.

Forensics - We know an awful lot about the nature of the people or things we are investigating, before we deduce what it created or not. And, if we don't know everything, we strive to find out more. Thus, it is a valid science.

Archeology - Same thing. (except with ancient artifacts that are just slightly sharpened rocks: That is often flat-out guess work.)

Cryptography – Same thing as forensics.

SETI - Different, for the very reason that we don't really know what the flark we are supposed to look for in extraterrestrial intelligence. SETI is all subjective guess work, and very little (if any) science. This is more akin to ID. But, at least they don't claim they found any intelligence at every little "funny signal" that suits their fancy. In fact, they never found anything at all, yet.

Intelligent Design - Without even trying to know the nature of the Designer, we cannot test for its existence, nor test if something was Designed by it or not. ID is subjective guesswork, not an empirical measurement, just like SETI. And, to make matters worse, their history of false-positives is rather embarrassing.

Bring us evidence of ID, and we will all change our minds. Here are some things to look for: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=81569

There is a lot of stuff known about lithics, and constant experimentation, I don't know if I would call it guess work

[articulett]

If ID is correct, then we can refine and hone communications with said designer and find ways to curry favor--maybe we can get him to grow back amputated limbs and tell us where the coolest fossils are buried and just give us a step by step of the twists and turns in the Genome as it mutated across eons. We've already got that #2 merge thing that happened with us and our chimp ancestors, but it would be great to get the fine details...it was a pretty big jump in our speciation--

Of course, if ID was true, we'd have to hold the designer accountable for the many flaws and waste. And I want to ask him/her/it/they why so gosh darn many spermatazoa. I mean that really threw me off and had me going with the whole evolution thing--the suffering and vestigal organs and fossil DNA too. What a trickster, that designer is. Maybe the intelligent designer is a little daft? He did make creationists in his image, I've heard, so the daftness could well explain what we observe.

[articulett]

Originally Posted by scotth

This gives me the idea to start a chain email saying something like scientists discover message from God in DNA. Discovery being suppressed. Make up some buzzword mashup of details that are deliberately self contradictory. Watch it spread like wildfire.

Well start making up some alternate bible code thing for the letters G A T C Because I don't think they spell anything... But you could break them down into amino acids and let the amino acids stand for various letters of the alphabet and then run it through various computer programs (Paul A is good at those) until it says something of prophetic bibl-ish sounding interest. Computer folks would be the new prophets, because only they could decode the hidden messages...

[ChristineR]

What savage hell have I wrought? You know if you guys went through with this and found a good match in your "code" to some interesting phrase then people would be all over it.

Use Hebrew--those pesky vowels make it so much harder to match random fluff to something that looks interesting.

[Wowbagger]

Originally Posted by ReligionStudent

There is a lot of stuff known about lithics, and constant experimentation, I don't know if I would call it guess work

It is educated guess work, perhaps.

[Wowbagger]

Originally Posted by T'ai Chi

Beleth, the 4 things have something in common alright; they involve detecting intelligences.

True. But, some of them are more subjective than others. The more subjective, the less scientific.

[JoeTheJuggler]

So how do you falsify a claim that something was intelligently designed?

SETI has been mentioned. We can look for all sorts of characteristics of perceived signal that might point towards an intelligence--repeated sequences, some encoding of pi, etc. Before SETI, in 1967 at Cambridge, astronomers found a radio signal with a clear series of quick pulses, each equally spaced and of equal duration. No one had seen anything like it in nature before. Clearly a sign of intelligence? That hypothesis was eventually ruled out when we learned about pulsars.

I think the lesson from this is that if you can find a natural cause for something that exhibits order, you have falsified the hypothesis that it was caused by an intelligence.

In biology, the theory of evolution explains the complexity of life forms. No need for ID. No need to think every pulsar found is a signal from an alien intelligence.

[H3LL]

Originally Posted by T'ai Chi

...dribble...

TC's third post in this thread and still nowhere near any explanation of the practical uses for ID.

[Foster Zygote]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

You have all the mods on "ignore"?!?
Why the h**l do you even post here, other than to get a rise out of the new people and to see your own name over and over and over again?

On the off chance that I am one of the many he's "ignoring", could some newer poster please quote this in a post so that he could see it?
Thank you.

Well he can't put the mods on ignore. However he has lamented his inability to do so in the past.

CF Larsen is convinced that he actually has no one on ignore because he couldn't stand to not read about himself in other's posts. I wouldn't be surprised if he is correct.

Most intellectually honest members of this forum put people on ignore for behaving in a chronically offensive way. T'ai Chi, on the other hand, if he really does have anyone on ignore, seems to do so for the offense of arguing successfully against some claim of his. Let me reword that: For arguing successfully against some article that T'ai Chi stated was "interesting". He rarely ever actually states a position. He remains vague and non committal seemingly so that he can later claim "I never said that" if the going gets rough. He'd much rather attack other people's positions than have to defend his own.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Foster Zygote

Well he can't put the mods on ignore. However he has lamented his inability to do so in the past.

CF Larsen is convinced that he actually has no one on ignore because he couldn't stand to not read about himself in other's posts. I wouldn't be surprised if he is correct.

Most intellectually honest members of this forum put people on ignore for behaving in a chronically offensive way. T'ai Chi, on the other hand, if he really does have anyone on ignore, seems to do so for the offense of arguing successfully against some claim of his. Let me reword that: For arguing successfully against some article that T'ai Chi stated was "interesting". He rarely ever actually states a position. He remains vague and non committal seemingly so that he can later claim "I never said that" if the going gets rough. He'd much rather attack other people's positions than have to defend his own.

That sounds reasonable. Having over 10,000 posts, most of which not showing any hard opinions, tells me that his ego is so overblown he probably does a search on his own name several times a day. How sad that he is ashamed to post his own opinions, though.

[Foster Zygote]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

That sounds reasonable. Having over 10,000 posts, most of which not showing any hard opinions, tells me that his ego is so overblown he probably does a search on his own name several times a day. How sad that he is ashamed to post his own opinions, though.

There might be some support for this in the form of his website, at least the part where he talks about evolution. It has a certain "Look at me admonishing the famous scientists for their silly mistakes" quality to it. He never mentions that the quotes he presents are taken grossly out of context.

[Jackalgirl]

Originally Posted by T'ai Chi

Beleth, the 4 things have something in common alright; they involve detecting intelligences.

ID is not about detecting or studying intelligences (lower case). ID postulates the origin of life (including, but not limited to intelligence) as being the result of an Intelligent Designer rather than random mutation + natural selection.

We already know that there are intelligences in the universe: us, for example. We already know that those intelligences make stuff. Forensics, cryptography, archaology (and other flavors of anthroplogy) are all studies involving either the existance, development, or activies of us. None of these things prove (or even lend credence to) ID. Sure, you could say "if we can indirectly study an intelligence (us) by looking at the things we leave behind, surely we can study God by studying what It left behind!" And that would be true, assuming that you accepted the premise that life, and Creation, were left behind by God. ID tries to establish that this premise is a good one, based on the "irreduceable complexity" of life forms on this planet. It fails, however, because it has yet to provide any evidence that makes this premise more compelling, or better supported, than random mutation + natural selection.

So no, none of the four things you mentioned will in any way lend credence to ID, because they are simply "studies of" or "searches for". None of them suggest, or prove, that the idea that "made by an intelligent designer" is more probable than "random mutation + natural selection".

I have been trying to think of ways to predict something that would support ID over Natural Selection, and honestly I can't. This is probably because I am not a biologist, so I can't think of specific examples of something that would be more likely the work of an Intelligent Designer than it would be the work of Natural Selection. This is, essentially, what H3LL is asking you, as I understand it.