Author:
Wade A. Tisthammer
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 10/ 3/04 12:43pm
In reply to:
Duane
's message, "The Genesis of Intelligent Design" on 09/16/04 5:49am
>Everyone:
>
>This short litte vignette started as part of a post in
>the "Problem with Intelligent Design" thread, in a
>response to Wade.
I'll do a similar vignette as a response to yours.
======================================================
Scenes from the Non-Intelligent Design Research Lab:
(or, perhaps, the world's most STUBBORN research lab)
======================================================
Researcher One: We’ve discovered this particular robot on Pluto, where no human has ever been before. I think this complex robot with a perfect replica of the Rosetta Stone enclosed within it came about through non-artificial means.
Researcher Two: Do you think it might have been intelligently designed?
Researcher One: What? That's just an outburst from laziness! Merely because its complex doesn’t mean it’s designed. Let's see if there's a natural means to produce the robot. Just because we can't figure out the answer RIGHT THIS VERY MINUTE doesn't mean we should shout "Intelligent Design!" Have you forgotten what this lab is for?
Researcher Two: Very well, let's search for a naturalistic explanation just in case.
================
Decades later...
================
Researcher Two: Well we've spent over thirty years working on it and we still haven't figured out a natural means yet. In fact a closer examination has revealed more problems than solutions. I think we may have to accept intelligent design as the best explanation.
Researcher One: Well, just because we can't figure out the answer RIGHT THIS VERY MINUTE...
Researcher Two: But you said that over 16 million minutes ago. I think we may have to come to grips with the fact that your theory might be wrong.
Researcher One: Lazy! You wicked and lazy servant of science!
Researcher Two: Huh?
Researcher One: Anyone who thinks my theory is wrong is guilty of laziness, pure and simple.
Researcher Two: But to its credit, ID theory has predicted all along that...
Researcher One: Lazy!
Researcher Two: But here, during our research we have some evidence suggesting that ID theory...
Researcher One: Lazy! You're solely bent on religious and political motives if you want to reject my theory!
Researcher Two: But I don't have any of those motives...
Researcher One: Lazy! Tell me, if you think this perfect replica of the Rosetta Stone was designed, who designed it?
Researcher Two: Well, I don't think we can determine that scientifically yet but that doesn't mean we can't rationally infer design...
Researcher One: Aha! That's proof your conclusions shouldn't be accepted! We've got to continue to believe that a solution exists for my theory, regardless of how unlikely it seems, and regardless of how well confirmed any prediction from a competing theory is.
Researcher Two: Why?
Researcher One: Because to do otherwise would be LAZY!
Researcher Two: You've got to be kidding me!
I hope it allows some to understand some people’s point of view regarding the issue.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
|
Feedback: 