Please read this carefully...\n\nDoes it rise to the level of a scientific theory?\nOr even a hopothesis?\nWhy or why not?\n\nThis link may help:\nhttp://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AtPspx5CqzU_htGM1fYTrRLsy6IX?qid=1006040717662
202090
No, it really isn't.\n\nThe fundamentals of intelligent design are basically anti-science.  The sole argument used in its support is to cease thinking about any subject which is not immediately understood.\n\n"That feature of life looks hard to evolve, therefore, Unnamed Intelligent Designer did it."\n\nI like to look at how history would be different if the great scientists of the past had used such logic.\n\nIsaac Newton:  "Gravity pulls things down, but the moon stays up.  How strange.  Must be God."  (Nobody works out the laws of physical motion.)\n\nEdward Jenner:  "I wonder why milkmaids get smallpox less seriously than other people... Oh, I guess God did it."  (Nobody invents vaccines.)\n\nIntelligent Design "theory" is the death of science.  It is lazy thinking.  It is simply accepting any unknown as an unknown and finding nothing in it worth investigating further.  It is the most fundamentally anti-science idea possible.\n\nThink my examples of overstated?  Consider the real life guru of the ID movement, Michael Behe.  He testified in court that nobody could figure out the evolution of the immune system.  When he was presented with dozens and dozens of articles working out the evolution of the immune system, he admitted having read none of them, but had no compunction about just declaring it "wasn't enough".  How much would be?  Here is a person who has stopped thinking.  He's supposed be a biochemist, but he has no interest in expanding biochemistry.  He found a gap and declared that God filled it and his thoughts stopped there.  Many, many other scientists, unencumbered by the albatross of ID continued to investigate and have expanded our knowledge of the immune system extensively, just so Behe can sit back smugly and declare whatever progress they've made cannot possibly be enough.\n\nI repeat, ID is the death of science.  ID is the most fundamentally anti-science idea possible.\n\nID "theory" is best stated, "It is absolutely undeniable that someone, somewhere, at some point, did some thing, using some methods, to create life."  That's not a theory.  That hardly qualifies as an idea!  But they can't fill in any of the vapidity.  If they fill in any of the unknowns, it becomes obvious they're trying to force their religion onto the masses.  Therefore, they're stuck with a vague framework of an idea.\n\nIf they could fill in bits, they might stumble into a theory that was testable.  If we replace "someone" with "My great grandmother", suddenly, we have an idea we can test.  A false idea, but still a testable one.  My great grandmother has identifiable properties.  We know how much biochemistry she knew.  We can judge the likelihood of her having done such a thing.  That likelihood is, of course, so close to zero there's little point in calculating it.\n\nIf we fill in the "how" gap with "using a screwdriver", then again, we can test it.\n\nBut ID theory refuses to fill in the gaps.  It claims to not be interested in who.  It claims to not be interested in where, when, how or what.  Dembski says it's a theory of "design detection".  But, again, how do we test it?\n\nDembski's filter resolves to two states:  Yes, it was designed!  We don't know.\n\nSo, can this be falsified?  Can we send something designed through and have the filter produce a false negative?  No, because the filter has no negative state.  It doesn't say "designed/not designed", it says "designed/don't know".  There is no way to test for a false negative.\n\nCan we test for a false positive?  Nope.  Since God is on the table here (and they refuse utterly to let natural laws have sway like real science does), everything in the universe supposedly could be designed.  So there is nothing that you can definitively say isn't designed to run through the filter.
81097
I do not believe there will be any "discoveries" for some time... in Physics, the theory is generally proposed first and then the emperical data is gathered to prove or disprove it, and the theory still has a way to go...
280526
Wow:  Thanks for the info about the DNA.  For those readers that wondered how the world comes into being without God creating what He alone is able and willing, such info as the DNA, let alone the rest of the whole complex of Created mass and masterpieces, it rests on this issue.  You see, you think, and you understand.  OR you see, and refuse to see, you think and you refuse to think, and you refuse to understand.  Part of that matter of Free choice.  The simple fact is, what you choose to believe is also part of the gift you were given in Creation.  You believe or not, and amazing, it gives you a part in the rest of the community.  There are adequate numbers of unbelievers, that will all affirm your faithlessness, just as there are adequate numbers of believers who will affirm your believe in pagan cult, just as there are adequate numbers of believers in Islam, or Christianity or any other form religion.  Numbers however, doesnt affirm factuallity.  Flat world theorists believe it.  Round world hanging in space believe it.  Sun circling the earth believers affirm it, as do earth circling the sun believers affirm their bit of observation.  \n   Did Noach go searching for the animals?  No, the Text says, according to Moses, affirming that GOd instructed him to write, that God caused the animals to come to the ark.  Noachs job was to build it and stock it with grain and grass, as all the animals would eat vegetarian while aboard, including Noach and family.  Is that possible?  Depends on how you view and believe.  Impossible for those who refuse to believe that GOD was involved.  Possible for those that choose to believe in such miracle process or natural process.   It is all amazing, no matter what you believe.  If you believe God created, thats amazing.  From my point of view thats acceptable.  What would be more amazing is to try to figure out how all this world in all its complexity came into being without a Creator God, since it is obviously more complex than any human can contrive.  Heck,,,we cant even create a blade of grass from nothing, let alone a human eye..or the rest of a human being.\n   The story of the group of scientists who were all working on a grand assignment, to duplicate life...and one day they all agreed, they had done it.  Accomplished the grand impossible,  they had developed a life form in a petri dish.   Eureka they shouted...we did it.  We dont need GOD any more.   THEN GOD SAID :  Now, try it without anything:  No dirt, no fire, no water, no air and no petri dish.
53339
Come on! You should know that the term "cosmic egg" is being used here only figuratively, not literally. The universe most certainly was not "hatched" from an egg. In any case, we humans like to use analogies to describe what we see in nature in order to relate them to things we understand. For example, lightning and thunder is usually attributed to the gods being angry. The fact is lightning and thunder has absolutely NO emotional content. It is just the discharge of excess electrical charges that build up in the clouds. So similarly, in trying to explain the existence of the universe, it is understandable that certain forms of biological analogy may be used, since we understand and can relate to birth via an "egg".
239418
Ever since man took an interest in the sciences, from perhaps the time of Aristotle onwards, from time to time great ideas have been put forward. Some of these have seemed initially ludicrous, and turned out to be so. Others, with a little development, have given us a great insight into the way that the world works and enabled us to move on. \nAt a given moment of time, it may appear that what we know is fairly correct and will correct timelessly. However, history has shown that this is not the case. Eventually, perhaps, we will know everything, but right now this is far from the case. \nTake one of the fundamental aspects of physics, for instance. For a long time now people have thought that the matter is made up of tiny, invisible particles; atoms and their sub-components. This is the model we learn and that everyone worked around. \nYet in recent times, this has been challenged, by what is known as string theory - and it now seems that this is a better model, perhaps the more 'correct' one. \nString theory, against the traditional theory of matter, says that matter is caused by the vibrations of a string-like structure. These are the fundamental building blocks of matter. It is a bizarre sounding radical theory at first, but now has much support. \nJust like a violin string when plucked will produce sounds, and different sounds when plucked in different ways, so it is with the universe - with string theory, the fluctuations give rise to matter. On this view, the universe may romantically be described as a symphony. The framework of the vibrating string causes the song that we see around us.
235264
Yes you are correct about the unknown Indian bit!! I haven't heard about either him or the experiment, and I haven't found any one else that has, but I think my 'teleportation' gear is playing up a bit, I'll get it re-tuned and try again later!! I thought teleportation was a means of transferring physical matter almost instantly? Not brain waves!!\nAre you sure your brain waves haven't been transfered??
163246
cannot prove or disprove this hypothesis.\n\npast empirical proof has been to tell someone to throw something up and see.  this worked until we started putting things in orbit...and beyond.\n\nnow, how do we know (or not) that those items that have exceeded our known local planetary orbit patterns will not come back because of a larger as yet unforeseen orbit?\n\nif anyone attempts to prove or disprove this it must include a hypothesis that effectively refutes the steady-state universe vs. the big-bang theories.\n\nthis would effectively place matter consumed by black-holes back to the initial "down" and all "up" would eventually return to the same place or "come down."\n\notherwise it is a lie.  technology and our knowledge of the structure of up and down have already effectively refuted this infantile "law" of gravity.  but thanks for reminding us of our humble beginnings in thinking.
374474
I used to love this theory as well, but apparently it's not too popular in the scientific community.  I'll try to find some links.\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquatic_ape_theory#Objections_to_Aquatic_Ape_Hypothesis
561905
It's the most likely skeptic's explanation. However, parthenogenesis does happen sporadically in higher animals, and rarity of such an event would satisfy both the scientists and the believers (who would claim it as a miracle).
576781
Here is a better story that you should let the children know about. There is enough evidence and similar argumenet on the links provided down below with translations in most languages:\nIf one believes that a living cell can come into existence by coincidence, then there is nothing to prevent one from believing a similar story that we will relate below. It is the story of a town: \n One day, a lump of clay, pressed between the rocks in a barren land, becomes wet after it rains. The wet clay dries and hardens when the sun rises, and takes on a stiff, resistant form. Afterwards, these rocks, which also served as a mould, are somehow smashed into pieces, and then a neat, well shaped, and strong brick appears. This brick waits under the same natural conditions for years for a similar brick to be formed. This goes on until hundreds and thousands of the same bricks have been formed in the same place. However, by chance, none of the bricks that were previously formed are damaged. Although exposed to storm, rain, wind, scorching sun, and freezing cold for thousands of years, the bricks do not crack, break up, or get dragged away, but wait there in the same place with the same determination for other bricks to form. \n When the number of bricks is adequate, they erect a building by being arranged sideways and on top of each other, having been randomly dragged along by the effects of natural conditions such as winds, storms, or tornadoes. Meanwhile, materials such as cement or soil mixtures form under "natural conditions", with perfect timing, and creep between the bricks to clamp them to each other. While all this is happening, iron ore under the ground is shaped under "natural conditions" and lays the foundations of a building that is to be formed with these bricks. At the end of this process, a complete building rises with all its materials, carpentry, and installations intact.\n Of course, a building does not only consist of foundations, bricks, and cement. How, then, are the other missing materials to be obtained? The answer is simple: all kinds of materials that are needed for the construction of the building exist in the earth on which it is erected. Silicon for the glass, copper for the electric cables, iron for the columns, beams, water pipes, etc. all exist under the ground in abundant quantities. It takes only the skill of "natural conditions" to shape and place these materials inside the building. All the installations, carpentry, and accessories are placed among the bricks with the help of the blowing wind, rain, and earthquakes. Everything has gone so well that the bricks are arranged so as to leave the necessary window spaces as if they knew that something called glass would be formed later on by natural conditions. Moreover, they have not forgotten to leave some space to allow the installation of water, electricity and heating systems, which are also later to be formed by coincidence. Everything has gone so well that "coincidences" and "natural conditions" produce a perfect design. \n If you have managed to sustain your belief in this story so far, then you should have no trouble surmising how the town's other buildings, plants, highways, sidewalks, substructures, communications, and transportation systems came about. If you possess technical knowledge and are fairly conversant with the subject, you can even write an extremely "scientific" book of a few volumes stating your theories about "the evolutionary process of a sewage system and its uniformity with the present structures". You may well be honoured with academic awards for your clever studies, and may consider yourself a genius, shedding light on the nature of humanity. \n The theory of evolution, which claims that life came into existence by chance, is no less absurd than our story, for, with all its operational systems, and systems of communication, transportation and management, a cell is
19014
I think more than any other thing--more than all other things combined, perhaps--there is a single, most important fundamental that must be understood: The Law of Mass Action.  The barrier to understanding evolution stems from the word "random."  We hear "random," and the instinct is to say, "Bull pucky."  But randomness, applied to the law of mass action, becomes every driving force in the universe, and the origin of all order.\n\nThis is a ubiquitous law in nature.  The hardest part of understanding something like evolution is trying to wrap your mind around the NUMBERS.  Those huge, infinitely-large number that are used to discuss propability are truly mind-boggling.  Once you realize that there are other examples of driving forces overcoming immense odds, your whole perspective on the probability of evolution changes.\n\nTake biochemistry.  This is some stuff that's completely undisputed.  A protein starts as a chain--or several chains--of amino acids, all strung together.  Miraculously, this protein folds into the specific conformation necessary to perform its function by the simple process of RANDONLY banging around.  That's it!  It just bangs this way and that, folds left and right, over and under, driven by nothing more than the RANDOM bumping and shifting caused by thermal energy bumping tiny articles against eachother.\n\nBUT!!!  Once it gets to a thermodynamically-stable conformation, it basically stays put.  It takes a million random bumps left and right, up and down, for each of the two joints connecting every individual amino acid on the thread, but once it goes the right way, it's mission is accomplished.  And all of this happens in the blink of an eye!  We have no concept of how incredibly quickly these minor bumps and bangs occur until the target reaches its mark.\n\nOr take diffusion.  This is an extrodinarily powerful driving force, and the law that governs it is so simple that it sounds absurd!  Here it goes:  It is more probable that something will go from where it is to where it isn't, than it is for something to go from where it isn't to where it is.  Done!  That's it.  I've just told you in a tiny nutshell what chemical engineers spend two years studying with differntial equations, labs, and computer models.  That's thermostatistics summed up.  And yet because I understood that very basic fact, I was able to understand the complex functions of the nerve cell far better than 99% of my molecular biology classmates.\n\nBear with me a bit longer: when a neuron fires, ions rush in and out of the cell in ways that depolarize and repolarize the electrical charge of the membrane.  It's really complicated-sounding stuff.  But what it really boils down to is that potassium ions (K) are concentrated in one place (mostly inside the cell), and sodium ions (Na) are concentrated somewhere else (mostly outside the cell).  All of these ions are banging around, this way and that.  Some go left, and some go right, but the membrane staps them from going through.  The special channels open up.  Na ions, being mostly outside the cell, will be far more likely to go inside the cell--where they aren't--than they are to come out of the cell--where they already are.  THat's all it is--you're more likely to go from where you already are to where you aren't than vice-versa.  It's so simple it stupid.  Yet the movement of any GIVEN ION is COMPLETELY RANDOM--and yet this action happens so quickly and so consistently and so reliably that this become the driving mechanism of all biological activity.  This random ion movement, taken applied to a massive system where thermal bumping happens millions of times per second for biliions of billions of ions happens in a reliable and concerted way every time you blink.  Every pixel you see on your screen right now is the product where trillions of random molecular collisions happened, but a handful of signific
653233
I suppose it could be a creation of our own mind. The scientific research on those subjects don't really provide solid proof to back it up. \n\nI don't think it matters. As far as I'm concerned, believe what you want, whether it's scientific or religious, but just don't force your beliefs upon others!!
347464
Ichi THAT is BRILLIANT......I know that in the tangential thinking that often bests me 'thinkos are the weakest links, perhaps the 'savants' of my mind and truly the innocents. Perhaps they are what saves my butt altogether.\nAbsolutely Brill!!!! I am going to ask if I may have permission to use this in my writing for in my speaking & writing i have for the first time just spoken it aloud...thank for the new concept on somethng I have been doing, another thing to obssess on, fair play to you mate, brain food doesnt often ome through the screen like this. and it just did.\nNow does this include the frontal and temporal lobes? Will Kirlean Photograhy show this in action? Or is it a different part of the brain where the lost socks of our lives go to?\nTHIS is a cool quesion. I now possess a new word..and it is awesome..."THINKOS"..now THAT is HOT!!!
623663
you seem to be so smug in your belief of evolution.  there is no proof whatsoever of it happening.  adaptation is different.  bacteria becoming immune to antibodies is adaptation.  humans do this all the time.  the bacteria aren't changing into anything different, they are still bacteria.  \nthere is no evidence in the fossil record either to support your idea.  in fact, all evidence in the fossils says otherwise.  there is no common ancestor of humans and primates.  nowhere.  lucy was an oversized chimp.  neanderthal man is equivalent to modern man in brain capacity, body structure, and everything else, what's the difference?  you can't use the tooth of a pig to create an entire skeleton of a human, that is called fraud (piltdown man).\n\ntry these FACTS: dr. frederick hoyle did a study on the probablility of a single-celled lifeform through means of random process from the beginning of time.  the likelihood of this happening is 1 in 10 to the 40,000 power.  (anything over 1 in 1050 is considered scientifically impossible).  hoyle stated, "evolution is nonsense in the highest degree"\nthe co-discoverer of DNA, francis crick; did a similar study on the chance of one single strand of DNA happening by random chance, but the results came that the chance is so small that it is nonexistant (so close to zero it's actually there)\n\nthe alternative? intelligent design.  all evidence points to a young earth.  if the earth is millions of years old: why hasn't it stopped spinning yet?  it slows down every year?  why hasn't the sahara desert taken over the plant yet?  it's growing by the day?  why have we never seen a single star form?  why hasn't the moon left us yet?  it gets farther and farther away every year?  \n\nother science would ask: why do some heavenly bodies rotate counter-clockwise if they all resulted from the big bang?  (according to the LAW of angular conservation, they should all be spinning the same way)  why isn't there a huge vacuum (present after any explosion); but the universe is instead expanding?  (refer to newton's LAWs of relativity)  why would the population curve put the start of humanity at about 4500 years ago, if we've been around for millions?  why is the oldest tree (also the oldest living organism) only 4500 years old?  \n\nuse evolution to explain morality, emotions, intelligence, abstract thought, love, etc.  you can't.  the only plausible answer is intelligent design.  \n\nanthony flue, once the greatest known and most highly revered atheist; writing over 30 books on the subject is an oxford double-doctorate with numerous other degrees and awards.  now a theist.  the clincher?  intelligent design.  unless you think that you're smarter than this guy (and it doesn't look like it from your grammar, spelling, and theology)  study a bit more before you go bashing theists.  \n\n"when science finally comes to the top of this mountain of truth, it will see that religion has been there all along."
616162
Personally I don't reject the idea, but I don't exactly embrace it, either.  \n\nLet me pose this to you:  If there are an infinite number of universes, and let's say, just for now, that there is a Divine Creator, did this ONE being create the infinite universes you describe?  Or are there in infinite number of this Creator?\n\nNext thought:  If, for every action/thought/possibility there is a separate universe, on how many of them would you actually exist?  On how many universes did life on Earth actually form (assuming evolution)?  \n\nLastly:  Take the statement that there are an infinite number of possibilities and that what we perceive from instant to instant is merely what we have CHOSEN to perceive at that instant, is there a separate universe created for each of those possibilities which are not perceived, or, because they aren't perceived (therefore not "real") do they fail to "launch" a separate universe?\n\nIf you haven't noticed, I find the ideas of possiblity incredibly fascinating. \n\nI hope I didn't make your brain explode!
223404
Think about it: how does living tissue that works on electrical and chemical impulses create a consciousness?  How does it create images and thoughts?  It is truly a miracle.  \n\nMy bet is science will never be able to fully answer or explain consciousness.  If you are a person of faith, I think God is the only way to explain such a thing.
216874
Dear episodes1979,\n\nI am neither fanatical nor ignorant, and, in fact, have done quite a bit of research on what we humans like to call "supernatural" or "miraculous".\nBased on what I know, I can make the certain conclusion that the universe is not merely limited to the existence of human beings.  We are important, but we are such a minute part of the creative force or energy that seems to surround us at all times.  The greatest of scientists and philosophers will tell you that there are far greater things, worlds, ideas, and concepts at work in our world than we can ever imagine.  Certainly, if there was such enormous energy that this whole galaxy evolved, why should it be limited just to animals, plants, and humans?  The main conclusion one can come to is that, yes, there are those beings, spiritual or physical or both, that are among us in different ways and realities.  And yet there are some completely natural phenomena that early uneducated man propagated as something supernatural and now we wonder what it may be.  Ultimately, everything can be explained scientifically or mathematically, even "ghosts" or "aliens". (As a matter of fact, we have come to call them "aliens", but all that it is is just other diverse life forms, some look like us, who have evolved in other galaxies, universes, etc.)  \nIt is not a fact of whether we believe or don't believe, but rather a fact of how open minded and adventurous we remain.  When we are born, nature provides us with a great openness of heart and mind and a great adventurousness for us to develop even more of it.  How sad it is that some would rather stick to the boring, simple concepts of Life as illustrated by the fact that we reason away our natural desire to be open and inquisitive.  I hope that people who read this will get encouraged on their search for truth.  Or for those who prefer otherwise, it is your choice after all and nobody should judge you for it, I hope you will one day truly investigate at least one of those things that seem to be "taboo" in our society to support (other life forms, us as spiritual beings existing in physical bodies, other mystical creatures).  After all, no matter what the truth is, the ultimate truth about our universe will always be there, and you will only get smarter and wiser if you dare to ask the hard questions and heartfully search for answers.