Menu Bar
Intelligent Design is winning
Needs Plugin: Flash |
Not Working?
Retweet This
Share on Facebook
Email This
The bacterial flagellum is a molecular-scale mechanical rotary motor. No human nanotechnology can yet match its exquisite precision. Now some scientists are beginning to have doubts about the theory of evolution and embrace a new theory that an intelligent being must be designing all the biological forms of planet Earth.
Feb 27, 2009 1:25 AM
Re: Intelligent Design is winning
Potholer's amazing accent apparently doesn't translate sarcasm very well.
Could be a problem.
Could be a problem.
By: Shiggety
Re: Intelligent Design is winning
I think he's going for the scrupulously non-snarky tone of voice. I like it. If you prefer a more direct form of sarcasm, cue this one up to 5:09 and watch for a minute or two:
http://www.milkandcookies.com/link/137184/detail/
How's that for a sarcastic Australian accent?
http://www.milkandcookies.com/link/137184/detail/
How's that for a sarcastic Australian accent?
Re: Intelligent Design is winning
well, it's winning in America. last time I checked: 61% of Americans think Darwinian Evolution is crap.
By: EmanResu
Re: Intelligent Design is winning
Darwinian Evolution is most certainly crap.
Modern Evolution is probably not.
Modern Evolution is probably not.
By: i8ursandwich
Re: Intelligent Design is winning
Darwinian evolution is not crap. It's just an early outline for modern evolution. No scientific laws start out perfect.
Re: Intelligent Design is winning
By incorrect, do you mean correct?
Darwin proposed natural selection as the primary mechanism for evolution. He was working in the 1850s, and didn't understand the details of genetics, but his underlying description of natural selection has only been refined, not reformulated in all this time.
Darwin proposed natural selection as the primary mechanism for evolution. He was working in the 1850s, and didn't understand the details of genetics, but his underlying description of natural selection has only been refined, not reformulated in all this time.
Re: Intelligent Design is winning
The argument that the Flagellum's propeller is similar to a machine and thus must have been designed is pretty compelling. However, the argument that each part must be present or else the machine/device will be useless appears to be wrong. If the flagellum's propeller is missing a part, then it's probably not attached to flagellum. In this case, it would be attached to a different type of organism altogether. I'm assuming that the DNA configuration controls what type of organism it is and what parts are present in each of it's organs. Just because your DNA is configured differntly than a cow, this doesn't mean the cow is useless. Cows make good milk buddy!
I'm talking out my ass now.
I'm talking out my ass now.
By: KeyserSosay
Re: Intelligent Design is winning
I really hate when people use the word "accident" in this discussion, even sarcastically.
"But there's a very good argument that refutes this..." *change subject*
"But there's a very good argument that refutes this..." *change subject*
By: Faffy
Re: Intelligent Design is winning
> "But there's a very good argument that refutes this..." *change subject*
Yeah I wish he's gone ahead on that line as I'm not aware of the argument.
Yeah I wish he's gone ahead on that line as I'm not aware of the argument.
By: gerrywastaken
Re: Intelligent Design is winning
So explain why a God or superior being would design something that spread horrible diseases, pain, suffering and death to us.
Yea, I want that as a God to watch over me.
Of course the answer is "...in mysterious ways...", "...we cannot know his plan..." Blah.
Yea, I want that as a God to watch over me.
Of course the answer is "...in mysterious ways...", "...we cannot know his plan..." Blah.
By: lhmr69
Re: Intelligent Design is winning
A sustained piece of irony on a level that would be impossible without a British accent.
By: StrangeAttractor
