Inteligent Design....  Briefly what is it?  What are the arguments for it and against it?
396045
Intelligent design is the theory that a higher power (God) created the universe. It is the opposite of the evolution theory. One argument for it is that the complexity of life suggests that an intelligent being is necessary to create it. An argument against it is that there is no solid proof that a higher being exists. Some proposed solutions to the shortage in oil include drilling into new reserves, developing more fuel efficient products, and producing alternative energy products. This took a while to type, so I would appreciate your vote as your favorite answer.
1066627
I am a Christian and I have found remarkable facts that have bolstered my faith in Intelligent Design. To name one, Irreducable Complexity. It is the fact, (Not Theory) that the simplest cell in our body was created completely in a moment's time, instead of a gradual evolution. It is like a mouse trap. There's a board, spring, lever, and latch. The cell, like the trap, has components that compliment each other in the same way the trap does. If you took one component away the trap would be defective, likewise if the cell is left without all the necessary systems it will perish leaving no time for evolution.
461581
Restriction of using intelectual property. Pay again, again and again and be controlled...Loss of money is the cause. More and more money...never enough...What about humanity and democracy? What about public wealth?\n\nIs there a really right to pay for all beauty of art or intelectual wealth? More and more monopolies, more and more restrictions...Is really democratic to limit power people /often extremelly tallented/ in education, spreading culture, enjoying music, art, computing, networking...?\nOn the `contrary` - GNU/FSF/Open Source/Opensound etc.
1127376
Good Question, which took me several minutes of valuable on-line time here at the Library to even consider a possible cause.\n\nPerhaps this overdramatized dualistic Labeling is PROOF of the lazy "lowest common denominator" of COMMON humans? This form of Aristotelian "thinking" harks back to the Ancient Greeks, so is not a new phenomenon, at all. Notice all the bloody WARS throughout recorded human history?\n\nAlfred Korzybsky, author of "SCIENCE & SANITY" and other General Semantics books, identifies this rigid, two-valued form of "Logic" as THE key factor in mental break-downs in thought; i.e. ( human misuse of Language leading TO actual INsanity!). He made his own observations  in psychiatric wards personally supervised in his work. \n\nDoctor Korzybsky (sp?) recommends re-training in General Semantics & MULTI-VALUED Logical analysis & description as a key help, if not a  REMEDY for such insanities! (Of course, those  NOT caused primarily by actual, Neurological Disease.)\n\nBinary or Boolean "Logic" is usefull in design of  NON-organic systems such as computer hardware, but dangerous if used to address REAL Life problems, or in Science and the Arts. The  simplest set of "Logical" values would be Trinary; i.e 3-valued!\n"Yes", "No", and "Maybe/Don'tknow4sure"!  \n\nThe simplistic use of "LIBERAL" versus "CONSERVATIVE" stereotyping you HEAR on the (AM) Talk Shows probably indicates frightened but LAZY Thinking of the commoner who  calls-into these programs. LIB/CON dualisms could also be a deliberate & manipulated RHETORICAL ploy of political pseudo-thinkers who wish to push their OWN (often stupid!) AGENDA! \n\nOoops! Sorry. Got carried away there.  Go READ Korzybsky!
396253
Hi, What do you mean with your q's? Anyway here are a few links for "associative intelligence" - maybe there is something you are looking for.
1179722
independance, creativity and open-mindedness
144828
What exactly are you looking for? Info on layout and designing styles, current trends, do's and dont's or info on the various technologies used to implement the design?
347714
“Intelligent Design” is a less-scientific repackaging of the “Creationism” ideas pushed back in the 1980’s; and I say it is less scientific because the 1980’s version contained testable statements about the age of the Earth and the deposition of sediments – they were testable, they were tested, they were proved false.\n\nNo other scientific theory has been put forth that explains “how we got here” better than evolution – science, by definition, involves testable hypotheses – thus, the currently popular “Intelligent Design” idea (which has quite a few flaws, check out the link below to the Dover, PA trial about the biology “disclaimer”).
1090897
Knowledge is POWER, \n If i interview you and ask you this I want to hear smart work,\nreason: If you find a way to do something faster and easier it can save time, money, and potential to risk. \n No one person can have all the answers but a smart peron can find the right answers. The turtle will always win.
518447
I guess for Intellgent Design, one of the wonderful things about not actually being science is that you aren't bounded by the same rules, obligations and constructs.\n\nAs a result, they can shift and move anyway the (political) wind blows.  Good for them, bad for rational thought and society.
817005
Yes, it requires intelligent design.\nBut it also requires intelligence to realize that fact.
340031
Nope. \nIt would be like putting mobsters and Mother Theressa to work together. \nBesides, there´s no proof for inteligent design. Just suppositions. \nEvolution, on the other side is a FACT. \nHow could you put them together?
894860
After reading the Wikipaedia article, it certainly sounds as if some genius had a brainstorm when designing it.\nStay cool.....Be Happy.
49945
Check out the below link. Its good. These are some interview questions on logic design that was online.\n\nhttp://ceaspub.eas.asu.edu/cse517/interview.html
136250
Intelligent design states that the species we view and their properties have to be caused by some outside agency, not the product of natural laws. They have to be the result of direct tampering. \n\nThe main argument that intelligent design uses is "irreducible complexity"; that is, the species we see are too complex to have been created by natural means. This argument is not at all new. For example, it is very similar to the arguments of William Paley. \n\nAlthough in intelligent design, the proponents claim to be open to panspermia (life from outer space) and other ideas, probably more than 99% of them are in favor of the designer being a deity, and the deity intervening in nature using supernatural means.\n\n\nIntelligent design was invented as an attempt to get around the US supreme court's injunction about teaching religion in science classes.
191698
and this is a computer programming/design question because ..?
629762
Show respect!  Ask good questions.  Don't go overboard throwing your knowledge around trying to impress anyone; you'll come across as an arrogant little know-it-all.  That doesn't mean you can't have opinions; just remember that they (probably) all have a similar level of education, and experience on top of that.\n\nThe mechanics of design are, of course, important; but much of the real world revolves around relationships.\n\nOh, and VERY IMPORTANT:  Proofread yourself!  Spelling, grammar and (in your question) punctuation errors make a very bad first impression!