This site is named for the famous statement of US Congressman Willard Duncan Vandiver from Missouri : "I`m from Missouri -- you'll have to show me." This site is dedicated to skepticism of official dogma in all subjects. Just-so stories are not accepted here. This is a site where controversial subjects such as evolution theory and the Holocaust may be freely debated.
My biggest motivation for creating my own blogs was to avoid the arbitrary censorship practiced by other blogs and various other Internet forums. Censorship will be avoided in my blogs -- there will be no deletion of comments, no closing of comment threads, no holding up of comments for moderation, and no commenter registration hassles. Comments containing nothing but insults and/or ad hominem attacks are discouraged. My non-response to a particular comment should not be interpreted as agreement, approval, or inability to answer.
posted by Larry Fafarman | 3/24/2011 06:40:00 PM
5 Comments:
how would an unintelligent designer be any different from evolution?
Lazarus Lupin
http://strangespanner.blogspot.com/
art and review.
I said,"unintelligent causes as well as intelligent causes allowed." Evolution has been compared to an "unintelligent designer."
ok you FIRST said no intelligent designer needed. I thought that inferred the possibility of an unitelligent designer. Apologies.
Funny how my comment a year ago suggesting you call it "unintelligent design" or "apparent design" got censored, and now you suddenly think it's the bee's knees. Almost like you liked the idea, but couldn't admit it and hoped I'd forget...
Bozo, you are just trying to steal credit for my idea.
"Unintelligent design" is not the same as "apparent design."
Also, "unintelligent" is ambiguous -- it can mean either random or stupid. "Apparent design" can have random causes. But if it is just stupid but from nonrandom causes,the designer could be sentient. "Apparent design" is the most comprehensive term.
Post a Comment
<< Home