Re: black holes and intelligent design

From: Ian H Spedding (harry_at_spedding53.fsnet.co.uk)
Date: 02/27/05 

Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:33:45 -0000

<cafeinst@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1109528759.622572.167570@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> The scientific community seems to believe that black holes indeed
> exist, yet no one has ever seen one. The belief in the existence of
> black holes is inferred from the observed behavior of matter and light
> outside of the locations of the alleged black holes - i.e., the
> observed behavior can only be explained by the existence of a black
> hole; therefore, black holes must exist. See
> http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/gr/public/bh_obsv.html and
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/02/050222195319.htm

That's right, black holes are predicted by _theory_, an intelligent creator
or God isn't. And there's a difference between evidenced belief and
unevidenced belief - or faith. Every time I let an apple fall to the
ground I find evidence for what we call gravity. I don't see the same for
God - quite the reverse, in fact.

> Yet when it comes to belief in intelligent design, when we see ample
> evidence of an intelligent Creator of life,

So you all keep saying, but you never show us any - and mousetraps don't
count, neither do eyes nor any other complex organs.

> which is
more sophisticated
> than anything that man has ever designed on his own, the scientific
> community decides, instead of using Occam's razor in explaining how
> life came about by inferring the existence of an intelligent Creator,
> to postulate that the sophistication of natural life was caused by
> accident.

Plainly, you don't know what Occam's Razor says. Here's a hint: until
you've ruled out natural causes, an intelligent creator is an unnecessary
entity.

> Yet, this alleged accident has never been reproduced in a
> laboratory. But the scientists still stubbornly believe that this must
> have happened.

The Big Bang, black holes, dark matter and dark energy haven't been
reproduced in the lab either. That doesn't mean there isn't good reason to
think they exist.

> This is a serious inconsistency on the part of the scientific community
> in how it makes decisions as to what it chooses to believe. This is why
> conventional science is becoming a religion of sorts.

Sure it is. That's why planes fly, antibiotics kill bacteria, we can see
galaxies ten billion light-years away and you have a computer to type all
your nonsense into. Scientists just prayed for it all and it appeared,
didn't it? It had nothing to do with long, hard years of research at all,
did it?

Like it or not, scientists believe what they believe because they have
evidence or at least good theoretical reasons for those beliefs. There's
evidence for evolution, there's none for your Intelligent Creator.

Ian 

-- 
Ian H Spedding

Relevant Pages

  • Re: LIGO.
    ... the use of the term 'relativists' shows a possible ... black holes almost no one here would argue against such a statement. ... Scientists _prove_ theories using the scientific method. ... but the second part of your statement 'with no empirical evidence' is ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: LIGO.
    ... and specific meanings in experimental science. ... the evidence or 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. ... hypothesis of black holes were known, ... I am not criticizing scientists studying black holes nor those ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: LIGO.
    ... I clearly remarked two or three times that proof in science has no the ... No, there is none evidence. ... hypothesis of black holes were known, ... I am not criticizing scientists studying black holes nor those ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: black holes and intelligent design
    ... >> evidence of an intelligent Creator of life, ... >> life came about by inferring the existence of an intelligent Creator, ... > What makes you qualified to tell scientists how they should do their job? ...
    (sci.chem)
  • Re: black holes and intelligent design
    ... >> evidence of an intelligent Creator of life, ... >> life came about by inferring the existence of an intelligent Creator, ... > What makes you qualified to tell scientists how they should do their job? ...
    (sci.physics)