I'm an intelligent design advocate and I want to know how people define Intelligent Design?

Question

It always seems that people that criticize the ID movement do not truely know what intelligent design is. Please, just answer as you think what it is. Thanks.

Answer 1

YOU should tell US!

Whenever I see an argument advocating ID, it seems like no more than a thin veneer for 'creationism'.

Creationist: It's obvious that God made the universe in six days.

Intelligent Designist: The universe is so complicated and vast that it's impossible for it to have come about by chance.  Science is inadequate to explain it.   The complexity of the universe and life and the human race strongly suggests that  some intelligence is behind the design of the universe.  So therefore it's obvious that God made the universe in six days.

Now I certainly don't mean to tell you what you believe.  Maybe I'm wrong.  If so please correct me.  But I have never heard a person advocate ID who wasn't a fundamentalist Christian and who didn't mean, by 'ID', -creationism-.

Answer 2

Maybe it's just me, but much of your arguement, as it is written, seems incoherent. Perhaps, you have knowledge of many facts, which are just simply, incorrectly conveyed.

I thought the whole "cigarette" thing was quite rediculous in it's concept and opinion. Not to mention, that one cannot destroy a forest that is yet to be discovered.

The fact of the matter, is that over the years there has been very, very much scientific information and discovery, which has been supressed. In fact,

buried. Some of it literaly buried within the confines of some locked away place.

Much of it kept from being widely spread, or spread at all, by attacking the credibility of that discovered, or the discoverer. Usualy with an elaborately manufactured explaination which sounds very scientific, but in fact isn't.

What I'm talking about are, objects or facts which either prove evolution to be impossible, or line up with, and support the accounts of the Bible.

Areas in science such as archeaology, mathematics, biology and others have produced discoveries that when they are first learned of by other scientists. Many times they have been individuals, whom for differing reasons have been reluctant to accept those discoveries.

If you can just imagine, an individual whom by the time he or she are considered a top athourity in their field, they have already invested a great portion of their career and life into that field.

Therefor, if that person had been for all that time directing his research and all the rest of the things involving his work, according to the theory of evolution. Then you can see the implications that such a person would be aware of, and what that person would be facing, whenever there is evidence that would completely dismantle, at it's core, that which his entire career has been based upon.

Starting over, from square one. Also, there is another powerful factor, often times at work in influencing such a person. Which is just simply that they hate the mere thought of the opposing view possibly being true.

Many people find it hard to believe that corruption and deception can come out from the world of science. However, with scenarios like the one I just described actualy taking place. Also, the incredible levels of power that politics often times emposes upon science. And simply the fact that scientists are members of the human race, for which there's no reason to believe that they are automaticaly immune to corruption, simply because of their walk of life. As we witnessed with the Korean conducting stem cell research.

There is much denied. There is much suppresed. There is much intentionaly lied about.

There are many who don't know about this.

Much less that which is denied, suppresed, buried, and lied about.

Answer 3

Unclear on the actual definition.  Personally, I think evolution is an ingenious and complex concoction of someone's making.  Its just so amazingly perfect and too complex to be random.   Truly!  Our thumbs alone are a miricle.  And do not get me started on the engineering of the eyeball.

Answer 4

Seems like you answered your own question... My problem with ID being taught as science, is that it all comes down to faith. You cannot prove, test or measure the idea of an intelligent designer. Therefore, ID is not, and should not be taught as, science.

Answer 5

Intelligent Design = Creationism = Not Science if so-called advocate is Christian.