We Are Safe From Bird Flu!

[cardcounter0]

Just watched a show where the World Health Organization was worried that the Bird Flu virus would evolve and become capapble of jumping from human to human, at which point it would become very dangerous.

What a bunch of fuzzy headed liberals. Don't they realize that evolution and virus being able to randomly mutate to become more efficient is a totally flawed theory with many holes. Intelligent design shows us that everything was created by an intelligent being, we have no fear from bird flu "evolving".

Crisis solved. Now I have to go scrap the ice off my windshield, which I couldn't possibly have to do, if those crazy liberal global warming theories were correct.
[img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[BCPVP]

Strawman

[cardcounter0]

So the intelligent designer did create evolution in virus, but not for any higher species that he created 8,000 years ago?

(just trying to keep up with the latest advances in modern science education)

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
So the intelligent designer did create evolution in virus, but not for any higher species that he created 8,000 years ago?

(just trying to keep up with the latest advances in modern science education)


[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think most people question micro-evolution. We can observe micro-evolution. It's macro-evolution that theists question. That's why your argument is a strawman.

[cardcounter0]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think most people question micro-evolution. We can observe micro-evolution. It's macro-evolution that theists question. That's why your argument is a strawman.

[/ QUOTE ]

So the intelligent designer was only smart enough to use evolution on a micro-level, but not smart enough to make it work on the macro-level?

[ QUOTE ]
We can observe micro-evolution.

[/ QUOTE ]

If only the intelligent designer had created observers with better powers of observation, then maybe macro-evolution would work too.
[img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

I am assuming that the dividing line between micro- and macro- evolution is defined by what "theists" can observe.

Which brings up another question - what are these "theists", I thought one of the fundamental claims of intelligent design was that it was a SCIENCE not a RELIGION, so shouldn't we be depending on the observations of SCIENTISTS, not the claims of THEISTS?
[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
So the intelligent designer was only smart enough to use evolution on a micro-level, but not smart enough to make it work on the macro-level?

[/ QUOTE ]
Or didn't want it to. Or didn't care. Who knows?

[ QUOTE ]
If only the intelligent designer had created observers with better powers of observation, then maybe macro-evolution would work too.

[/ QUOTE ]
Apparently you don't know what macro-evolution is.

[ QUOTE ]
I am assuming that the dividing line between micro- and macro- evolution is defined by what "theists" can observe.

[/ QUOTE ]
You assumed wrong. Go learn about the topic before you post sarcastic things that make you look stupid.

[ QUOTE ]
Which brings up another question - what are these "theists"[?]

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you being intentionally dense or do you just not know?
If the latter, dictionary.com is your friend.

[ QUOTE ]
I thought one of the fundamental claims of intelligent design was that it was a SCIENCE not a RELIGION, so shouldn't we be depending on the observations of SCIENTISTS, not the claims of THEISTS?

[/ QUOTE ]
There aren't that many people who believe in ID. And I doubt you'll find many believers in ID here. In any case, this thread almost belongs in the SMP forum.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So the intelligent designer did create evolution in virus, but not for any higher species that he created 8,000 years ago?

(just trying to keep up with the latest advances in modern science education)


[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think most people question micro-evolution. We can observe micro-evolution. It's macro-evolution that theists question. That's why your argument is a strawman.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not just theists or creationists question macro-evolution. Many scientists (primarily microbiologists) question some aspects of macro-evolution. One of the insidiuous parts of the whole ID debate is to paint all people who critique traditional Darwinism with the same brush.

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So the intelligent designer did create evolution in virus, but not for any higher species that he created 8,000 years ago?

(just trying to keep up with the latest advances in modern science education)


[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think most people question micro-evolution. We can observe micro-evolution. It's macro-evolution that theists question. That's why your argument is a strawman.

[/ QUOTE ]

We can observe macro-evolution, too, unless we are so blinded by religious dogma that we refuse to accept any evidence that conflicts with it.

In fact, the whole notion of micro-evolution being somehow different from macro-evolution was something dreamed up by "creation scientists" to try to explain away the fact that evolution is easily observable. But hey, a virus that makes the change from infecting birds to infecting people isn't really a new "kind" or species, is it? It can't be; that would be macro-evolution and the Bible says that can't happen.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

We can observe macro-evolution, too, unless we are so blinded by religious dogma that we refuse to accept any evidence that conflicts with it.


So you're basically saying that any microbiologist that disagrees with the traditional Darwinist explanation of how evolution happened because it's never been experimentally re-created is in the same class as a religious dogmatist?

I've heard so much about bird flu, and all the indecision about
whether it's going to become a real problem. I decided I should
take action and protect myself. I just installed this protective
barrier today...





















Bring it on, birdies, show me whatcha got!


[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]