Hi Bobby I find it thoroughly interesting the assumptions that are made as soon as someone mentions “Intelligent Design”. It’s quickly thought to be unprovable, therefore it should not be taught in schools. Then entire bases of intelligent design is showing the flaws in the evolutionary theory and if we did not evolve then where did we come from? Intelligent Design is taking the origin of the species back to formula. Darwin’s theory is left without a leg to stand on scientifically. If people wish to have faith in this swiss cheese theory, that is up to them, but allowing it to be the only theory presented in school is dogmatic. I understand the point of this so called religion of the Flying Spagetti Monster. The ignorance that flows from the purpose of this obscene “religion” is quite amusing. However, its reasoning is flawed. You wish for people to teach the theory of the Flying Spagetti Monster with out any plausible scientific backing, where as Intelligent Design is only using science to show the flaws in evolution and to say that another theory needs to be made. Perhaps you should study things more thorough before starting a movement… Enjoy, Brad
Hi Bobby I find it
Published by Bobby Henderson February 12th, 2006 in Hate Mail (and concerned criticism). 18 Comments
18 Responses to “Hi Bobby I find it”
| 
uh dude. ID has NO SCIENTIFIC data behind it. Just an idea of irreducible complexity. NO DATA. And the reason Evolution is taught in science class is because as a THEORY it does have data which supports it. Perhaps you should think before posting Brad.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
you are correct, id doesnt have any proof, they only poke holes in evolution, but the open letter would be so much less fun if all we did was try to disprove evolution… very good point
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
1: Do you think of ancient Greek mythology as wrong as soon as somebody mentions it?
2: Show me the evidence that Evolution is wrong and ID is correct.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Since when is ID the scientific side of the argument? And why oh why can nobody take a joke?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
actually Evolution has more evidence than any other theory, and do you find it weird givin your standpoint that only heavy duty bible humpers are the only ones that beleive in it, think about it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
I just love how the braindwashed fundies say that their religion has tons of science to back it up, while the scientific theories are only beliefs. So twisted. So typical.
PL&P!!
RAmen.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
I just love how the braindwashed fundies say that their religion has tons of science to back it up, while the scientific theories are only beliefs. So twisted. So typical.
PL&P!!
RAmen.
Little wrong there. He says that ID points out the flaws in evolution with science, but says nothing about backing ID up with science. I dunno about you, but I’d chose the one that makes more logical sense according to that argument.. evolution.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Perhaps you should study spelling more thorough(ly)before starting a letter.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Aaaah Brad…If I were you …I’d be really depressed at my lack of grey matter. Or, maybe I wouldn’t be as I would be unaware of my relative dimness. Perhaps you should study this site more thorough[ly] {adverbs modify verbs and are often accompanied by the ending -ly} before you insert your foot into your oral cavity.
Unless you like that kinda thing, in which case I say – damn the torpedos, full stupidity ahead!
Cheers
PC
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dude – you can SEE evolution working. Artic animals are larger, to conserve body heat. Island dwellers tend to be smaller, to conserve scarce resources. People in hot climates are darker, to protect against more UV rays. Mates are chosen for gene superiority. So what are the “holes” in Evolution? That we haven’t found fossils of every individual of every species? Give me a break.
Even so, Bobby isn’t necessarily championing evolution – just trying to prevent ID. It’s not science when you throw out a few ridiculous ideas, then say “that’s when God (whose existence is still unproven) stepped in and a bunch of miracles happened!”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Brad, you are completly WRONG. There are incontestable proofs that confirm the evolution theory since few years. When Darwin created his theory there was very few resources and knowledge available to him but today with DNA we have NO DOUBTS about evolution. Look at that:
Human hair linked to ancient claws
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2008/11/13/2418641.htm
By analyzing our DNA we can prove that we have common genes with lizards…
And the ultimate proof: The flu virus. There is 2 evolution type. Macroevolution and Microevolution . The flu virus adapt itself each year to infect us. It changes its genes, it evolves, due to mutation, natural selection, artificial selection, gene flow and genetic drift! This is microevolution. It’s very easy to observe that with virus and bacterias because they are simple organisms. For complex organisms, like human beings, it’s called macroevolution and it takes millions of years…
It is COMPLETLY FOOLISH to think God created a thing because you don’t understand that thing… stop listening that theologic bullshit. Just admit that God doesn’t exists and that you are not a part of a “divine” plan.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Honestly, I think we should teach both.
Actually, why can’t they be one and the same?
Surely there must be others who believe we were intelligently designed,
and believe in evolution…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@ Brad,
As you state: “Intelligent Design is only using science to show the flaws in evolution and to say that another theory needs to be made.”
Is arguing an argument with another argument, science? If you say to me,”The earth is flat” and to prove the point you push a bowling ball on level ground and point out that the ball doesn’t roll. I say, “Silly man, the earth is round” and I push the ball on the same spot as you and sigh, “Well, I’d prove it to ya’ if I could find a slope”. How is that to prove anything except that you have two very stupid people with a bowling ball?!
Where does ID use science to defend itself? Circular arguments? You said that ID is taking the origin of species back to formula. What formula is that? That an intelligent agent designed all life?
OK! I say that intelligent agent is the Flying Spaghetti Monster! ID says the intelligent agent could be anything, not necessarily a god. Offended? Why? Does it offend you on some fundamental level to think that a plate of pasta made you? Takes the origin of species back to formula, don’t it? And its so elegant! The FSM made the universe(Check), mountains(Earth, check) and a midgit(lower form of life, check), and pirates(perfected human, check-point-Chickie!), so is the history of the world! Faith in it? You aren’t supposed to have faith in science, its NOT a religion! You don’t worship Darwin when you accept the theory of evolution. Do you worship Newton and Einstein? I know you believe in the THEORY of gravity! Pick up that bowling ball, son. Drop it on yer’ clod-hopper, see if it floats in the air!
Now if you haven’t got the message by now that you can’t say Intelligent Design without including the FSM into your formula, and that you’d better “Believe in evolution” because any other so-called theory out there(unless its scientifically based) is going to make you and your clique` look hella’stupid, then … shit.
Pick up that damn bowling ball! Hold it over your head… and make it float!
RAmen!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hi Chanty (#12)
“Honestly, I think we should teach both.”
No, ID is not scientific, it should not be taught as science as the ID lobby want. Even teaching it in religious classes exposes children to ‘education’ that is completely at odds with scientific truth. I hope we’re moving away from a world where we promote superstition over evidence.
“Surely there must be others who believe we were intelligently designed,
and believe in evolution…”
The Intelligent Design lobby deny evolution, evolution does not deny the possibility of a god. The ID lobby are the closed minded ones.
Wdabrock (#13)
“I know you believe in the THEORY of gravity!”
Take a look at http://christiansdontbelieve.ytmnd.com/
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@Chanty : “Surely there must be others who believe we were intelligently designed, and believe in evolution”
I.D supporters are stupid and probably in the Flat Earth Society group too. Science is here with facts, experiments, theories… if you want to belive that “god” created something, OK, you are a ignorant fool, but it’s your pathetic choice. It has its place in a (brainwashing) religion class only so don’t teach that in a science class!
Here is some evidences of evolution:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent
And…
===Gravity===
+Things falling is an observation of the pull of bodies towards each other.
+Bodies pulling towards each other is called gravity.
+Gravity is a fact.
===Explanations for the facts of gravity===
+Aristotle and Galileo created explanations of the fact of gravity. These are now obsolete explanations.
+Newton’s explanation of gravity is approximately correct but required refinement.
+Einstein’s explanation is a refinement of Newton’s explanation of gravity. Einstein’s explanation is currently the most accepted explanation of the fact of gravity.
+Einstein’s explanation of the fact of gravity is called The General theory of relativity.
—->Gravity is a fact and a theory Evolution is a fact and a theory
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
===Evolution===
+Fruit flies changing generation to generation is an observation of generational organism change.
+Organisms changing generation to generation is called evolution.
+Evolution is a fact.
===Explanations for the facts of evolution===
+Lamarckism, Transmutationism and Orthogenesis were created as explanations of the fact of evolution. These are now discredited explanations.
+Darwin’s explanation of evolution is approximately correct, but required refinement.
+The modern evolutionary synthesis is a refinement of Darwin’s explanation of evolution, which did not include genes in its explanation. This modern synthesis is currently the most accepted explanation of the fact of evolution.
+The explanation of the fact of evolution provided by the modern synthesis is the latest and most widely accepted Theory of Evolution.
—->Evolution is a fact and a theory.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
As far as I understand it, intelligent design is supposed to be an alternative to natural selection, not an alternative to evolution. Evolution is not a theory, it is fact, it has been observed. Theory comes in as a means to explain it. The theory of natural selection is a scientific theory because it provides a natural explanation for why evolution occurs. Now, intelligent design does not predict anything different than natural selection, so one can never really know which one is true. The problem is that ID provides a supernatural explanation for why evolution occurs. Its main argument is that the universe is too complex to try to understand it. This is the antithesis of science. Science is about probing and testing and pushing the bounds of our understanding of the world around us. If we just throw up our hands and say it’s just too complex, than there will never be any progress. That said, I have no problem with individuals believing in whatever higher power, or believing in intelligent design. I don’t discount the possibility, but the point is we don’t know. Even if there is a higher power, he/she/it may have set up the initial conditions of the universe, and then let it go on its own from there. But the fact remains that all of this discussion of possibilities of higher powers and an intelligently designed universe has no place in a science classroom. If people want to have this taught, it should be taught in philosophy classes, not science classes.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By the way, even if you can found flaw in the evolution theory, that doesn’t mean that evolution is false, only that we did’nt understood it fully, and that rhe theory is still perfectible. Newton, was false with his gravitation equations, but does that mean that gravity doesn’t exist?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0