Why is the notion of intelligent design so ridiculous?

Question

Seriously! We've mapped the human genome, created robots that interact and learn just like humans.

Why is it so impossible to believe that we were created by a person, or a race that is incomprehensibly beyond ours scientifically?

Why not call this person "God"?

It's almost crazy not to believe in it. If the human race exists much longer, I would dare say that we can create some form of life.

Answer 1

There is no proof that we created by itelligent design.  And if for some reason we were created by someone then who created them and so on.  I am an atheist but I am still trying to figure it all out.

Answer 2

I agree 100% cool hey :)

Elise, thanks & all the best.

Yes a little intervention on the way up mount improbability.

Answer 3

Because "intelligent design" has no supporting evidence, it can't be tested or even put in the realm of hypothesis. Because evolution is unable to answer "all" questions with definitive evidence some find it lacking & refuse to accept "I don't know yet" as an answer.

If, none of us knew the answer to "what is 1+1?" then some would conclude 1+1 = God &  detractors would be scorned. Humans want easily understood answers to all questions & consider any small piece of missing evidence (when applied to science) as being evidence of a hoax.  However, if one gives a simple answer, "like God did it & it is not for you to know" then that is acceptable. Many questions are under investigation & rest assured that if any evidence of intelligent design is found, we will all hear about it.  

We are able to manipulate genomes & have successfully spliced genes from some species to another. Biologists have documented many gene mutations in the last 20 years, & all findings support evolution, so give them time to find the answers before you decide the man in the sky did it.

Answer 4

Let faith be faith and science be science.  Don't try to scientify(is that a word) God, it doesn't work.  God's existence is the realm of faith, it can't be proven or unproven.  And to those who truly believe, it does not need to be proven.  Science is entirely different, for a theory to be a theory it has to have boundaries.  It has to be able to both be proven and unproven.  

Intelligent design is one poor attempt at trying to create science out of faith.  If you believe in God, believe in Him, you don't need to prove His existence.  That is what faith is all about.

Answer 5

To take a moderate approach not favoring either

side:

Science needs Theology .Theology needs Science.Both are schools of thought .Therefore being human it is flawed.Man is not perfect . Neither schools of thought is not perfect being of

man.The two schools of thought need each other

to survive.

Answer 6

The short answer:  because it IS rediculous.  Unlike any accepted search in science, it doesn't rely on any proof.

The Long answer:

SCIENCE doesn't work on believing.  Science works on proof - we go from where we know, and explore into what we do not know, and we don't jump steps and just say that it is a result of some god...  now, IF in some point in the future, some scientist finds PROOF of some sort of god figure, it will be far different (Though I highly doubt that THAT will ever happen...)

As for evolution not being a proven fact, it is a far more PROVEN *THEORY* than any other out there.  we can see it in microscopic orgainisms, and we do have genetics to connect us to past peoples.  Science prefers to use our senses that we have developed to observe nature and come to LOGICAL conclusions that flow, rather than jump to illogical conclusions as religion does.  

I will agree with one thing thing you have written, and that is that we do not have all of the answers.  Something to keep in mind is that science as we know it has only existed for a matter of a couple hundred years - and we are constantly changing theories as new observations come into view.  Though science is here to report observations - not to dream up different ideas for how someting may be, and then find facts that fit that box... but to take what we have observed and draw a shape around it... box or not, and we use flexable materials for the box to allow the idea to expand and to change.

Lastly, on thing that I want to clarify; we have yet to create a robot that interacts and learns like a human being.  Some may take that as ammo for ID; though in reality it is simply because the living body - human or otherwise - is more amazingly complex, and requires such powerful, fast, and complex reactions that even our most powerful computers can't come close.  The very act of walking, much less running is a HUGE challenge to a robot.  Learning is something that we are still working on in computers - we program a computer to react a certain way if something happens - but it cannot innovate or create by itself.  To quote the movie Short Circut "...it just runs programs!"

Answer 7

You don't present it because it is not science.  It is NOTHING but religion that distorts science.  It uses FAULTY logic and completely illogical DISTORTIONS.  It is a FACT beyond any doubt that we a physically descended from other animals and they all share common ancestors back billions of years.  If you want to call that intelligent design then the design started at a point of the most primitive life on earth.  That isn't what they say.  

They make up drivel like no species have ever been seen to have formed.  If you have absolute proof beyond any sane doubt that two species share a common ancestor, you can see how the statement is nothing more than a distortion aimed at the ignorant.  Species take many generations of separation to form, longer than you can watch them.  They need quite a lot of time to become genetically incompatible.

We have all the evidence we need from genetics studies and the fossil record.  Those that push intelligent design ignore and distort the obvious conclusions. They are obviously trying to push some very ridiculous and completely contradictory untrue notions.

Answer 8

Ed pretty much summed up my belief.  If you take the example you gave, the human genome, it is full of evidence for evolution.   You can take your DNA and compare it to your parents and find out you are indeed their offspring.  Taking that further, you can compare our DNA to a chimps for example and identify particular modifications (mutations).  These are consistent with humans having a common ancestor about 5 to 6 million years ago.  You can do this with all animal species.  This DNA evidence matches nicely with fossil evidence though due to geologic factors, we only have limited evidence, but it is practically indisputable.  There is as much evidence for evolution being true, in my opinion, as there is the earth is not flat.  To arbitrarily add some force into this designing us seems to me to be hard to justify with any evidence except wishful thinking.  There is much we don't know and I don't discount God or an afterlife, I am simply trying to look at the evidence of which I am aware and making a rational conclusion.

Answer 9

good points. i dont think the notion of intellegent design is ridiculous. seeing as to how we dont know exactly how we did get here anythings possible. maybe a giant being farted once and in that f**t came our universe... we may be god's f**t.

Answer 10

That's not really what Intellegent Design is about.  What you say may be possible, but it would be wrong to call that person God.  God has to create the entire universe and it's already here.

Answer 11

It is not ridiculous.

It is intelligent design because of the complexity and order in the universe. It shows that there was an architect behind everything that exists.

So we have mapped the human genome.So we have created robots.

But it is the order thatmakes up the map that shows: "Look at this genome, This is amazing, there is no way this happened by chance, it definitely has an plan behind its creation."

It is the unbelieveable complexity of the components that make up the chips in a robot that suggests a supernatural intelligent designer.

It is the fact that we humans can do these things that show the order and intelligence in the universe.

Ask yourself, "Could this happen by chance?"

If you have any iota of sense, the answer is inevitablly,"No way!"

This is too perfectly in order with laws governing everything to happen by chance.

Think about it.

Answer 12

Atheist don't understand the concept of "incomprehensibly". An evolutionary ability that they haven't received yet.

(World record for thumbs down on the way)

Answer 13

Because the concept is not only unnecessary, but useless: it can't predict anything.  Evolution (now a proven fact) is quite sufficient to explain all facets of how present life evolved from the first form.

Answer 14

It's not ridiculous, it explains life better than any theory.

Answer 15

Theirs no reason to not support what you say. Lets assume that since 3000 years ago it would be impossible for someone to believe that something could pass through a wall and come out the other side. Well, we have that everyday with your router signal for your computer communicating through the wall to get to wherever your laptop might be, if it is not in the same room. Or the cell phone, or radio wave. How this happens may have seemed impossible to understand 3000 years ago, but we know that communication at a distance with a cell phone, or  using your computer in another room, is all possible. What seemed impossible than, even nuts, is all very real in todays world. So let us assume that you've given forth a theory that should be given a notion of interest. This theory, called the intelligent design theory, which has some support, may in theory be true, but how close we are to prooving it may be either tomorrow or 3000 more years from now. So my intention is to basically supply for the moral for why what  your saying may be true, since nothing you've said explicitly implies anything harmful or bad based on what I can say is your intention.

Answer 16

Ridiculous is an understatement. The church used to believe that everything in the universe revolved around the earth. They forever lost credibility since then...and now is no exception.

Answer 17

Why does the notion of intelligent design have to be associated with religion?  Why not conclude that the Earth was designed by an "alien race"?  Based on your reasoning, it is just as probable that an alien race created our Earth as we know it.  If this sounds absurd, then it probably is, since there is no evidence to suggest this to be true either; no different than there is evidence to suggest that our Earth was intelligently designed by "God".  

In terms of comparing the notion of intelligent design to that of mapping the human genome or creating robots, one could easily argue that we are fully aware that a "person or persons" was responsible.  We can identify and/or locate the group of people working on the Human Genome project; or we can pinpoint the robotic engineer who designed a particular robot.  One cannot simply locate "God" to verify that he or she created the Earth.  Likewise, which "God or gods" will choose from?  From which culture will you choose?  Or is it strictly the God of the Judeo-Islamo-Christian myth?  If so, this would obviously be a very ethnocentric conclusion.  

Assuming that "God" or an "alien race" intelligently designed the world, then one must first prove that "God" or the "alien race" exists or had existed.  And, of course, this has yet to occur.  Instead, we rely upon "faith" and not evidence to support the claim that our Earth was intelligently designed.  

In the meantime, science must rely upon the evidence that is available as it exists in the natural world and natural universe.  And, the best evidence that we have so far is the evidence that points to a world that developed by natural means.

So, in this sense, intelligent design is NOT scientific since it incorporates supernaturalism into the realm of science.  And, to incorporate supernaturalism into science, one might as well incorporate telepathy, ghosts, astroprojection, astrology, the Yeti, Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster, alien abductions, telekinesis, and psychic powers into science too.  As you can see, this won't fly!

Nonetheless, considering that the intelligent design debate has been ongoing for over hundred years or more (and has yet to be concluded scientifically valid), I doubt that scientists will be convinced today.  Yet, the debate will continue on...

Answer 18

its not rediculus to me the more we find out about space the more i believe until we know what happened before the big bang how will we know? it`s interesting that dinosaurs were killed by something we could possibly prevent thats just a small example of what we or any other intelligent life form is capable of. motive is where you have to wonder, think about our minuteness and the giant possibilities there are as much as we have learned, we still know very little.

Answer 19

We're discovering just how amazingly put together life is.

To contend that this came about by chance is ridiculous.

Evolution conflicts with common sense, observation, and scientific principles.

Answer 20

You are going to make the "word police" very upset, A birds wing was designed for flight, I dont care what anybody says

Answer 21

because God didn't create man. man created God.

Answer 22

It's not Intelligent Design that is ridiculous but Intelligent Design supporters. They want Intelligent Design to be accepted as a valid theory but throw temper tantrums when it is challenged AS a theory.

Theories are used to explain phenomenons, when new data or observations contradict or don't fully agree with the theory it is either amended or outright rejected.

The Theory of Evolution has undergone many, many amendments:

- When Mendel discovered the pattern of her inheritable traits, the concept of heredity was included.

- When changing trends of ancient fossils were observed the Theory was amended to accommodate speciation. (Macroevolution)

- When DNA was discovered, the Theory of Evolution was changed accordingly.

Scientific method demands that all theories be tested

- Proven theories (i.e. genetics) will continue their existence as theories

- Theories that can be amended to accommodate inconsistent observations must be amended so that they do.

- Theories that cannot explain contradicting evidence must be rejected.

If Intelligent Design supporters want Intelligent Design to be accepted as a valid theory, they MUST allow it to be scrutinized in the same way as a theory.

Intelligent Design must be amended to address all experimentation and observations, which may include modifications (i.e. non-benevolence, non-omnipotence, non-singular) or even elimination of the theoretical "God" figure.

But most importantly, if Intelligent Design CANNOT sufficiently address all contradicting evidence Intelligent Design supporters must allow it to be rejected and buried along with all the other failed theories.

It would be RIDICULOUS to make an exception to the scientific method for a theory just because it contains the word "God."

Answer 23

you are not asking a question... some people believe in God, and some don't.  That is why we are all individual.  I don't think life would be very interesting if we all thought the same, and did the same things.  How boring.

Answer 24

First of all, you can accept faith and a liberal interpretation of the Bible, and believe that evolution has taken place, is taking place and will continue long after your body returns to nutrients in the soil. I know I do, and I refuse to give up these concepts. One comforts me and reminds me to act with concern about others, and the other reaffirms my belief that we are still flawed and only a stepping stone on a greater journey for life on Earth.

I think it is absolutely absurd that there is a debate over teaching the theories of evolution in high schools, yes, there is more than one variation. I graduated high school in 2001, took AP Biology and was NOT taught anything about evolution, guaranteeing a failing grade on the standardized test to get college credit for the course. And that void fed my desire to learn and is why I became an Anthropology major at a very well respected university. Not to belittle adherents to faith, but to broaden my understanding of the nature of life.

Faith has gaps that can never be filled. But that is why you have faith, to accept the gaps and fill them with your own understanding to the universe.

Science tries to be certain of all things, removing variables when possible and coming to concrete answers. Sometimes there just isn't enough information available yet to make the answers a certainty. Evolution, however, has a lot of evidence and first hand observation of it at work (fruit flies, guppies).

So I do not think it is incorrect for me to use evolution to fill in the gaps in my own religious beliefs.

I would like to make one statement about the "Question". I do think it is incorrect to equate our construction of artificial life or the manipulation of actual life to a concept of "intelligent design". It is like saying "that wall cannot be white." "why not?" "because I'm going to paint it blue."

Answer 25

I think this is more of a debate than an actual question. There are those who believe that "God" created life, however, if this were the case (and I believe scientists also questioned this back in the early 1900's when Darwin's Theory of Evolution became known), why did he allow certain species to die out. Many species have been created and have since vanished, others have evolved over time to adapt to their environment or changing circumstances, to continue with their lives. Evolution is in fact proven by the hundreds of fossils which resemble nothing like there is on Earth today, and cannot be placed in any specific genera.

If people wish to believe they were created by an individual that is a personal choice. Personally I prefer to believe that life found a way to fight its way from small beginnings to what it is today, than to put my faith in some whimsical all powerful entity.

You say that you do not believe in evolution, yet you say "If the human race exists much longer, I would dare say that we can create some form of life." Isn't that showing how much the human race has evolved over time, that we have gone from individuals who used stone tools, to people who are able to create a form of intelligence themselves. Even if you do not believe in the early hominins, look in the bible. 2000 years ago there were no cars, there were no skyscrapers. Humans have evolved whether you choose to believe that or not.

If it makes people happy to put their faith in a god/gods then that is up to them. I prefer to stay open minded, and at the moment evidence (for me at least) indicates that we were not created by intelligent design.

Answer 26

????

Our mapping the human genome etc. is irrelevant.

There is no evidence that any sort of supernatural being exists; it's not sensible to think that an infinitely powerful, complex, and intelligent being requires no explanation.

Thus, there's no reason or evidence to think there's a god.

The reason intelligent design is so ridiculous is that there is overwhelming reason to accept science; none to reject it.

AND, the ID-ers have come up with ridiculous nonesense to make their bogus theory "work."

It's not crazy to believe sensible things for which the evidence is vast and varied; it's crazy to believe implausible things for which there is no evidence.

Answer 27

that's the whole problem right there .. our culture gives words way too much power

languages can create realities though ... the indigenous people of Borneo have never been raped; why? because they have no concept of rape, no word for rape ... well maybe now they do, but once upon a time, it was more primitive there, and things un normal to us, were normal to them

in the Philippines there's no way to say , "i hate you" ... closest is , "i really don't like you."

so language can play an odd role in forming our realities.

but intelligent design, ya call it God, Mother Nature, The Universe ... whatever , cuz it's definitely intricate and complex

Answer 28

Assigning responsibility for the universe to a god adds complexity unnecessarily. Where did god come from? What's he like? How do we know there is a god?