Father, Son, Holy Ghost? More Like...

Guns, Germs, and Steel. That was the three biggest things that have shaped our civilization. Our species (just like any animal) was molded and shaped by our environment. How did we form huge cities when we started out as nomadic hunter-gatherers? We adapted. About 11,000 years ago, the 'Fertile Crescent' underwent an environmental change. The area became colder and more arid. Food became scarce. We went from traveling in small packs and hunting wild game to setting up small settlements, cultivating crops, and domesticating livestock for milk, work, clothing, and food.

Humans striven under those conditions. Once the land was over-worked till production went down (about 9,000 years ago) the earliest known farmers went nomadic again. There the principle of farming and domestication spread to other parts of the globe.

Humans adapted over time to fine tune the cultivating process. They were able to support a much larger population; and, in turn, less people were needed for maintaining the crops and with the advent of storage methods, wheat and barley was able to be stored for later use. That gave way for specialized professions since not everyone was needed just to find the food. That also gave way for FREE-THINKERS to invent new tools and also mix iron and copper to create the first steel tools.

The Spanish Conquistadors spread destruction all over the New World. All for the attainment of Gold and Silver. Not only did they have guns and steel (the finest swords on earth), they also brought with them a hidden weapon, one they didn't know they have: Smallpox. Through adaptation, Europeans (over many centuries) developed a resistance to the Smallpox germ. Over many years, Smallpox decimated Europe; those who survived happened to have a genetic mutation that fought off the germ better than others (Darwin's Theory at it's best). Those who didn't have the protection died; those who had the protection survived and mated with other survivors. Their offspring then had the same protection, thus, eliminating the ill-effects of Smallpox.

The people of Inca's and Aztec's never was exposed to viruses like Smallpox. Why? because Incas and Aztecs never had such a close relationship with livestock as the Europeans had. Most of humans most violent germs were spawned from the close contatct with livestock like pigs, sheep and cows. There were none of those animals in Central America, and the animals that was used by them were not as revered and protected as the sheep and pig in Europe (they never slept alongside their animals)

At the end it is suggested of 20 million humans died from the spread of Smallpox in the America's. And once Europeans spread to Africa and destroyed that continent, the spread of guns, germs, and steel was complete. The adaptation and evolution of human man; brought up to a point of intellectual and scientific advancement that nobody thought we'd be at even twenty years ago. But now some factions want to take us back to those proverbial nomadic hunter-gatherer days.

The term "intelligent design" came into use after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the 1987 case of Edwards v. Aguillard that to require the teaching of "creation science" alongside evolution was a violation of the Establishment Clause, which prohibits state aid to religion. In the Edwards case, the Supreme Court had also held that "teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to school children might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction." In drafts of the creation science textbook Of Pandas and People, almost all derivatives of the word "creation", such as "creationism", were replaced with the words "intelligent design". The book was published in 1989, followed by a "grass-roots" campaign promoting the use of the book to teach intelligent design in high-school biology classes.

The same Supreme Court ruling prompted the retired legal scholar Phillip E. Johnson, in his 1991 book Darwin on Trial, to advocate redefining science to allow claims of supernatural creation. A group including Michael Behe, Stephen C. Meyer and William Dembski joined Johnson in aiming to overturn the methodological naturalism of the scientific method (which he describes as "materialism") and replace it with "theistic realism" through what they later called the "wedge strategy". Behe contributed to the 1993 revision of Of Pandas and People, setting out the ideas he later called "irreducible complexity". In 1994 Meyer made contact with the Discovery Institute, and in the following year they obtained funding to set up the Center for Renewal of Science and Culture to promote the intelligent design movement seeking public and political support for teaching "intelligent design" as a creation-based alternative to evolution, particularly in the United States.

Intelligent design is presented as an alternative to natural explanations for the origin and diversity of life. It stands in opposition to conventional biological science, which relies on the scientific method to explain life through observable processes such as mutation and natural selection. The stated purpose of intelligent design 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 A. Dembski, one of intelligent design's leading proponents, has said 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." In the leaked Discovery Institute manifesto known as the Wedge Document, however, the supporters of the movement were told, "We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design. Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions."

Proponents of intelligent design look for evidence of what they term "signs of intelligence": physical properties of an object that point to a designer (see: teleological argument). For example, intelligent design proponents argue that an archaeologist who finds a statue made of stone in a field may justifiably conclude that the statue was designed, and may reasonably seek to identify its designer. The archaeologist would not, however, be justified in making the same claim based on an irregularly shaped boulder of the same size. Design proponents argue that living systems show great complexity, from which they infer that some aspects of life have been designed.

Intelligent design proponents say that although 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 ... 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. In the 20 years since Intelligent Design was first formulated, no rigorous test that can identify these effects has yet been proposed. No articles supporting intelligent design have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, nor has intelligent design been the subject of scientific research or testing.

How can Intelligent design be a scientific process if, by the CREATOR'S own acknowledgment, it CANNOT be tested. Almost like you have to have a BLIND FAITH in a 'science'?

No comments: