Provide the name of any “evolutionist” that claimed that fish had a “bad design.”
What you have presented is a straw man argument. You pretend that your opponent has made an argument, then you demolish the argument that you created, and declare “victory” over a position your opponent never held.
I read your link. No evolutionary scientist was quoted. The people who claimed that one could not have both stability and maneuverability were engineers, not evolutionary scientists. Until you provide a quote from an evolutionary scientist about the motion of the fish being “wasteful,” you have done nothing but create a straw man for you to tear down.
Once again, we see people pushing Creationism, (or its stealth cousin Intelligent Design), bearing false witness. Imagine that.
You mean like the false stories that Creationists have told about Nebraska Man, Orce Man, and Lucy? Or like the claim that you keep posting without any evidence or citation that “Intelligent Design” has been demonstrated when every claim for ID has already been disproved by science?
I find it very telling that the site devoted to “Intelligent Design” gets a domain name of “evolutionnews.org” so that it can masquerade as something its not.
Astrology was never science. One definition of science is:
Astrology was never subject to hypothesis and testing. In more recent times, when it was tested, it failed. Miserably. There never was any scientific basis to astrology to begin with, nor any credible mechanism as to how it could work. This is why it was discarded.
Just because something looks scientific (to you) and was a long time ago doesn’t mean it was science. The scientific method wasn’t even developed until a few hundred years ago and when it is applied to most ancient beliefs, they fail. That’s why they are not science.
Evolution, on the other hand, has been tested, observed in the laboratory, evidence seen in physical records, and is such a unifying theory that without it, nothing in biology makes any sense at all.
Ken Miller refuted this expertly in court in the Dover case, referenced above. He proved this hypothesis terribly wrong, and brought a stack of books and papers to the court to back him up. The parts do not have to be in place all at once, and no machine has been found yet that couldn’t have been built from less complex parts. Indeed, we have numerous examples of exactly those parts.
You are spouting falsehoods and ignorance. This is nothing new and we’ve seen it all before. You have been given refutations, yet you continue to repeat your mistakes. The fingers-in-ears philosophy is a child’s tactic. “La, la, la, I can’t hear you!”
Is this where you get your biology? Is this supposed to open my eyes? You’ve said all molecular machines and enzymes are proteins. You never answered my question about what type of molecule actually strings amino acids together into peptide chains.
Well, it was always subject to the same tests performed more recently. Even the ancient Sumerians could have done controlled tests, double-blind challenges, and the like.
The problem with astrology isn’t that it isn’t falsifiable. The problem with it is that it has been falsified!
Not that surprising; literally the whole point of “Intelligent Design” is to pretend it’s something it’s not. It’s just a very thin mask for plain old creationism. Even the courts say so.
Today we see no non-replicating cells in the process of evolution built little by little. Nor can it be done under laboratory conditions. If evolution were true there should be billions of non DNA cells building themselves up until DNA replication is achieved. Evolution utterly fails to explain it. Intelligent design has a better explanation.
ID has not been falsified. That’s the problem. That is why evolutionist keep saying they are creationist and believe the earth is 6,000 years old. They are blowing smoke so you don’t investigate.
Ignorance again. You are confusing abiogenesis (the origin of life) with evolution (how life reproduces and changes).
ID is not an explanation of anything. It’s an excuse when all other explanations fail to satisfy someone who is dying to find a religious reason and has decided to stop searching for a natural one.
Can you give an example of a scientific discovery made by ID?
Nonsense. Science doesn’t claim that life originated as cells being spontaneously built like that. And the lack of crude life forms appearing anymore if explained easily enough; anything heading in the direction of life gets eaten by already existing life long before it can remotely qualify as alive.
And as said the origin of life isn’t the same thing as evolution in the first place. Even in some other world where life really was artificially created by passing aliens or something, there would still be evolution.
No, “intelligent design” aka creationism just throws up its hands and says a wizard did it. It explains nothing.
Hardly, you are describing your own position, not mine. Intelligent design is literally nothing but propaganda. There is nothing whatsoever of worth to it; it’s just creationism with a paper-thin mask.