UK based ID pressure group

**Cuddles** · 25th January 2007, 02:28 PM

Originally Posted by vbloke

I've been putting together a "Web 2.0" version of Intelligent Design which I call "intelligent designr" (I'm at work and it's a slow day...)

you can see it in all it's glory here: intelligent designr

modern science has postulated that all we need to explain these seemingly unsolvable puzzles is an answer.

I like you. :D

**vbloke** · 25th January 2007, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by Jocky

Good stuff, Mark. I particularly like the new words "hamsterma" and "complicatedness"

[nitpick]"blatantly" misspelt as "blatently" under "What about Science" - unless of course this is because hyper-bunnies from a higher dimension can't work spell checkers :) [/nitpick]

BTW, have you managed to force yourself to watch all the Truth in Science "teaching materials" yet?

Thanks.

I've watched all 6 episodes, I haven't got the courage to watch the hour long version up yet...

**Admin** · 25th January 2007, 06:53 PM

I've seen the 6 episodes too.

They're slickly produced and cleverly presented. It will be well worth commenting on them as they rely on several examples of fallacious reasoning, not least the ultimate one: we don't understand this therefore God did it.

I think that anyone without a scientific background could easily be persuaded by the arguments presented - especially if they don't hear the other side.

**vbloke** · 25th January 2007, 06:58 PM

They're deceptively narrated and the vox pops are cunningly worded.

There's a lot of emphasis on "chance", "random", "designed" and "complex"

All of which is done to almost subconciously stack the deck in their favour.

I'm trying to write up reports on them, but I'm a lttle swamped with university work as well, so they're taking time to do - plus, there's only so much I can watch before I want to kill something.

It's also interesting that Behe and Dembski are still going on about irreducible complexity and the flagellum, despite this being thoroughly rebuked (not least during the Dover Panda trial).

**Admin** · 25th January 2007, 07:09 PM

Yes, there's a lot of emphasis on the personal incredulity of the scientists which support ID too.

My suggestion is that we take each episode individually, place it on the website (if we can claim fair use) and do a write up on each episode.

I'll be happy to do some.

Spread the workload.

**vbloke** · 27th January 2007, 02:27 PM

OK - I've done Episode 1 and the Teachers Manual and I'm currently ploughing through Episode 2.

If anyone else wants to have a crack at them, be my guest.