What are some recent scientific discoveries pointing towards the possibility of "Intellegent Design"?

Question

What are your personal thought/beliefs on this subject?

Answer 1

Shouldn't this question be in the mythology section?

:-)

ID (aka Creationism) researches and studies nothing.  All Creationism proponents do is try to chip away at evolution, in the hope that by discrediting it people will jump to the conclusion that since evolution's wrong, then the Bible must be right.  In pretending there is controversy where none exists and in pretending there is an atheist and anti-American conspiracy to stifle open discussion (i.e. "academic freedom", Expelled), the Creationism people are perpetrating the most un-American act of all--attempting to break down the wall separating theology and government.

EDIT: Loke echoes one of many common mistaken assumptions made by Creationists.  The irreducible complexity of the flagellum motor has been tackled already.

For more information on the lies perpetrated by Creationists in their campaign to have their beliefs taught at taxpayer expense, I would recommend the Nova program "Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial":

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/

EDIT PT. II:  Oh, so you ask an innocent question and then recoil in shock when you receive honest answers?  That sounds like a bit of a loaded setup if you ask me.  I see no defensive answers here at all.  (Well, except for perhaps this last paragraph of my answer.)

Answer 2

genetic engineering (cell manipulation) is seen in Genesis 2 when Yahweh and the (Elohim) angels created Eve from Adam's bone marrow that is where the cell nucleus is located. Jacob's dream was about DNA coming from constellation Orion-heaven. The Genesis talks about the genetic code way before the modern era, in the genesis account the genetic code was the tree of life. The Sumerians spoke about serpents and build artifacts of the serpent all that was is the genetic code for DNA. Moses caduceus was a serpent headed rod built in the shape of he genetic code.

I'm not a religious fanatic or consider my self a creationist I just read Genesis from a scientific point of view and anyways Genesis comes from the Sumerians epic called the 'Enuma Elish' that is not classified as a Religion so don't suggesting.

Answer 3

well there is the flagellum motor. the flagellum motor is something that shows life. it is a very intricate piece of work and needs to be put together in the exact way or it will not work. it is very hard to believe that random chance put together the flagellum motor because of all its small and detailed parts. this shows that someone intellegent designed and created life

Answer 4

It depends on how you are using the term "Intelligent Design"

I think everything points towards a designer, who created the universe and the world.

I do not think it was done in 7 days.

I also do not think evolution, or survival of the fitest contradict the concept of a creator. Afterall, he had to create things somehow. I am pretty convinced of Stephen Goulds model of evolution where changes happen rapidly in very short periods of time in response to specific changes in the enviroment.

Evolution is not in questions, its been observed in nature, its understood, and it can and has been demonstrated in laboratories.

You have to understand that Darwin had a PhD in Theology. The people around him believed completely in the literal translation of genesis, and thought that any scientific contradiction proposed by an ordained minister would destroy Christianity altogether. This is why Darwin was really hounded. If he didn't have a PhD in theology, there would never have been a controversy.

Answer 5

The discovery and development of oil.

http://www.wtrg.com/daily/oilandgasspot....

.

Answer 6

Lack of transitional fossils,

Lack of gained genetic material in mutations,

Lack of evidence of an old (billions of years) earth,

Lack of reliability of carbon dating.

We see evolution within families and types... so you can force a fly under all sorts of conditions to mutate into other types of fly. This is evolution but there is a huge lack of evidence for evolution to a different type... i.e the flies are all still flies...

Evolution relies simply on the fact of millions of years and trust.

Evolution, creation, both theories, both require faith.

Good luck in your quest for truth!

There's something about the direction of galaxies too... their spin

and the fact we never witness stars being born...

Answer 7

There are none.

Answer 8

There are NO "recent" (or "old" for that matter) discoveries that point to "Intelligent Design" (please note the CORRECT spelling of intelligent).  

Intelligent design is a pathetic attempt of religious, bible-thumping, Genesis-believing literalists to shoehorn religion into a scientific wrapper.

Answer 9

Intelligent design is a crock - designed to get religious teachings in to schools.

Answer 10

Concerning wannabediva's response:

First, there are hundreds of "transitional fossils" that have been found. The land animal to whale series is particularly nice. Just google "whale evolution fossils" and you'll find information about that.

"Gained genetic information" frequently occurs through gene duplication and the mutation of one of the duplicated copies. There are many examples in all organisms of this phenomenon.

The earth IS about 4.5 billion years old. All scientific evidence supports this age of the earth. The only thing that doesn't support this is the biblical account in Genesis.

Carbon dating IS reliable, given the correct and careful handling of the material and the proper interpretation of the results.

If you go to www.talkorigins.org, you'll find a ton of information refuting each of the other points made in that reply.

Answer 11

It's nonsense I believe it's nothing more then a means of getting around them not being able to teach religion in public schools and a tool for religious people to in force there beliefs on children because they can't convince the parents to do it for them. It's really despicable and treacherous of them. Who's to say which religion is right? A book or scroll that long ago lost it true meaning? A long dead loony?

Answer 12

If you're going after the whole evolution thing,  I have been told that the eye is the current best argument for Intelligent Design.

How or why would an eye develop, based on successive changes how would the body/eye know what its purpose was to evolve in the first place?

Don't get caught up in the defensive game, nobody has ever been able to prove evolution. Just come back next week and ask the same naysayers if they can prove evolution. It's a game the detractors play to keep you from you goals. YA is a Godless microcosm of society, you're only going to get their world view and most often a taste of their immaturity.

Answer 13

There are no scientific discoveries that point towards the possibility of intelligent design (a.k.a. creationism).

Creationists simply attack evolution with misinformation and falsely assume that creationism is the only other alternative.  That's just not how science works.

They also claim that "irreducible complexity" supports creationism, but it's really an argument of "I can't figure out how it could have evolved, therefore it couldn't have evolved, therefore it must have been designed."  This is called "argument from ignorance" or "argument by lack of imagination", where if you personally can't figure it out it must be false.  However, this often requires that you ignore the explanations given by others, such as the various proposed methods that the bacterial flagellum could have evolved.  This is also known as a "God of the gaps" argument, where "God" is used as a substitute for a real explanation, and this is used as evidence of "God", however that argument crumbles when a probable scientific explanation is found.

They also make spurious arguments from information theory, but they never properly define what they mean by "information" and they're incorrectly applying information theory anyways.  Even if they were right about it, which they aren't, that isn't evidence _for_ creationism, it's only evidence _against_ evolution, they're just assuming that it's the only other alternative, which is a fallacy known as a "false dilemma" or a "false dichotomy".

The worst problem is that there really can be no evidence for creationism, because it makes no testable hypotheses.  Literally *any* data you find fits the creationist model if you assume a deity could have created everything from scratch, including putting fossils in the ground.  This puts it outside the realm of science, because untestable claims cannot be scientific hypotheses.

So, until "Intelligent Design" puts forth a testable hypothesis, instead of simply attacking evolution, there can be no scientific discoveries that point towards it.

Answer 14

You can't spell! LOLOLOLOL