|
|
|
Atheists Have Nothing
to Fear From ID First and foremost, it has no scientific basis, and has provided no proof of its claims, but let's set that aside for a moment and PRETEND its claims are true: Let's pretend life was designed. What life? Intelligent Design (ID) indicates cells are too complex to have arisen through natural means (without proof, of course), but it only addresses CELLULAR life. Perhaps this Designer only designed the first self-replicating microbe, then let evolution take its course from there, simply as an experiment for its own reasons, not in order to create a race of worshipping subjects. Who designed it? ID doesn't say. Could have been aliens visiting our planet. Could have been a god which, although Creationists would like us to believe is THEIR god (the Christian god), ID doesn't identify. It could have been a GROUP of gods working together. It could have been a time-traveling faerie named George the Purple. If a Designer designed us, does it require worship? ID doesn't say. Perhaps this god created life on earth just to see how long it would take us to develop intelligence. Perhaps this Designer thinks our religions are ridiculous, especially Fundamentalists. Perhaps this god thinks atheists are the best examples of human dignity on the planet. Or, perhaps the aliens are just waiting for us to develop the proper amount of intellect to communicate with us, then they'll come and take us away in their spaceships. If a Designer designed life, is that Designer still living, or existing? ID doesn't say. Perhaps the GOD of ID is dead. Perhaps its last act was the creation of a single self-replicating microbe on this planet. ID doesn't require an EXISTING Designer, after all. When did this Designer design life? ID doesn't say. That means all this criticism of age-dating techniques doesn't advance ID at all. The Designer could have designed a self-replicating organism during the Precambrian time period, and that would satisfy the claims of ID while still adhering to known evidence. Criticism of age dating science is a creationist tactic, not an ID tactic, and only serves to reinforce the creationists belief in a literal interpretation of the Bible. ID doesn't claim the Bible is true. If the Designer is "God", do humans have a soul? ID doesn't say. Is the soul eternal? ID doesn't say. Is there an afterlife? ID doesn't say. Is that afterlife the Christian version of an afterlife? ID doesn't say. Is there sin? Salvation? Heaven? Hell? ID doesn't say. Revealed scripture? ID doesn't say. Was Jesus the Messiah? ID DOES NOT SAY! In fact, ID does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to advance any religion or god. Those poor creationists who have hitched their hopes to this unscientific proposal are in for serious disappointments if they believe ID is going to help them advance their religion. So, even if the claim of ID is true, it has no real religious impact on atheism at all. So why should atheists oppose ID? For that matter, why should anyone? Because it is bad science, for one, but also because, as has been demonstrated REPEATEDLY on this forum, ID proponents are little more than Fundamentalist Creationists in disguise, attempting to subvert REAL science and taxpayer dollars to advance their own religious agenda. ID supporters/creationists aren't interested in science at all. IF ID proponents stuck to the merits of their theory, that would be one thing, but they can't. It simply has no merit. They continually fall back on their religious CLAIMS and on criticism of solid science, using creationism arguments that do NOTHING to advance ID as a scientific theory. ID is therefore ANTI-science, and ANTI-reason. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All contents Copyright
© 2002-2004 by Atheists Anonymous (unless otherwise noted). |
