Today, I will prove that
Intelligent Design is heretical by nature. I will prove that the leading proponent of ID, namely the
Discovery Institute(DI), is trying to lead us down a path of unrighteous doom.
ID is a creation of Satan and her minions. Find out why in the depths of the underworld.
Here's what ID proponents think:
The stated[8] purpose is to investigate whether or not existing empirical evidence implies that life on Earth must have been designed by an intelligent agent or agents. William Dembski, one of intelligent design's leading proponents, has stated that the fundamental claim of intelligent design is that "there are natural systems that cannot be adequately explained in terms of undirected natural forces and that exhibit features which in any other circumstance we would attribute to intelligence."[9]
Aha! Mr. Dembski (oh how he must've been tortured as a child with a name like that) is basically saying that things are too complicated to occur on their own. There must be an intelligent dude who created all of this.
Proponents of intelligent design look for evidence of what they term "signs of intelligence" -- physical properties of an object that point to a designer. For example, if an archeologist finds a statue made of stone in a field, he may (ID proponents argue) justifiably conclude that the statue was designed and then reasonably seek to identify the statue's designer. He would not, however, be justified in making the same claim if he found an irregularly shaped boulder of the same size.
The most commonly cited signs include irreducible complexity, information mechanisms, and specified complexity. Design proponents argue that living systems show one or more of these, from which they infer that some aspects of life have been designed.
Intelligent design proponents say that while evidence pointing to the nature of an "intelligent cause or agent" may not be directly observable, its effects on nature can be detected. Dembski, in Signs of Intelligence, states: "Proponents of intelligent design regard it as a scientific research program that investigates the effects of intelligent causes. Note that intelligent design studies the effects of intelligent causes and not intelligent causes per se." In his view, one cannot test for the identity of influences exterior to a closed system from within, so questions concerning the identity of a designer fall outside the realm of the concept.
Here's where it gets tricky. What Dumbinski is trying to say that if something appears to be designed, we don't have to go and find out how it got there. We just have to go find the designer.
Likewise, we don't have to "observe" something, we can just "detect" its influences on nature.
Let's switch gears for just a minute:
Take note of the very first commandment (also take note of the second, since it begins with the letters I and D).
Bringing it home
Okay, we first have to define irreducible complexity:
...a single system which is composed of several well-matched interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning. (Behe, Molecular Machines: Experimental Support for the Design Inference)
Think of a watchmaker. He's got all these cogs to think about. It's very complex and so if we see a watch, we must assume that it didn't just appear. It had to have been designed, manufactured and assembled. God, for our purposes, is a watchmaker.
One would have to assume that the Intelligent Designer (God) is more complex than the watch itself, otherwise, the watch would've designed him.
He is the statue we have not directly observed, but have detected and he must have a designer of his own, considering how complex he must be to create such fabulous watches.
I ask this, if the designer is so complex as to have his own designers, does that not mean there is more than one God? Perhaps it might even mean that there are far more powerful and complex Gods than the one we worship.
Remember the first commandment? I do, too, but it seems the proponents of ID have either not thought their theory through or they are heretics.
The short explanation
ID is based on the concept that some things are so complex that they must be designed. The question is, designed by who? You'd think that any designer must be more complex than what he designed, therefore, the question is, who designed the designer? It's an old argument, but here it's the correct argument.
By reading the concept of ID, one can only assume that there are a multitude of Gods out there. Each one more complex than the other. They should go back to simple faith. At least there, they have a chance to get into heaven.
hink