|
Aug. 2, 2005 How dumb is George W. Bush? Yesterday, he was endorsing the teaching of intelligent design alongside the theory of evolution. Intelligent design which isn't even a scientific theory could be considered an oxymoron in name. There is no intelligent scholarship behind this psuedo-science, and as can easily be demonstrated, there is abundant evidence that life has evolved haphazardly. And if the universe was created by an intelligent being, he must have made a lot of mistakes along the way. I wonder. Did this intelligent being get bored with dinosaurs? For one-hundred million years, dinosaurs were the dominant large animals on earth, and then bang! they were gone with the exception of a few species in the bird family. According to intelligent design supporters, the following must be an untold story of the bible. T-rex and triceratops stopped worshipping the ultimate intelligent designer and started worshipping the rock God. In a rage the intelligent designer (who intelligent design "theorists" can't call God, if they want to sneak their fairy tale into schools) smited them all with fire from the sky. Supporters of intelligent design insist that their theory is not a religion, but all funding for their propaganda comes from religious sources, especially Christian fundamentalists. Intelligent design is not science, and they fail to produce any scientific data in support of their claims--they have not even been able to establish a coherent research program. One of the basic rules of science is testability. There are no experiments that can test the existence of one being who has designed the entire universe. So intelligent design flunks--it can not even be considered a science because it can't be studied scientifically. If there is an ultimate intelligent designer, he wasn't very intelligent. There are plenty of examples in nature of evolution that did not seem to have occurred in a very intelligent manner. As an example, I am going to use the evolution of the human female breast. Long ago, the lizard-like mammals developed modified sweat glands to produce milk that would nourish their young. (Remember that next time one sees Pamela Anderson's breasts. Men shouldn't get excited, and women shouldn't get jealous. They are nothing more than modified sweat glands.) This alone debunks intelligent design. What was wrong with the old way. The little baby lizard-like mammals could run around and feed directly off what was available in nature. Why did the intelligent designer make life harder so that it was necessary for the animals to develop milk-producing organs? Maybe, lizard-like mammals refused to worship him. Eventually, hominids evolved. Other apes have very small breasts, and they seem to function perfectly well. So why was it necessary for the intelligent designer to make the breasts of homo sapiens larger? If design was really intelligent, breasts would have stayed small, and energy for the body could have been used in a different, more useful way. Instead, they became a sexual display object. Men seeing a woman with large breasts would understand that that woman was likely to be more fertile and would chase after them. He might then see another woman with still larger breasts and chase after her, and the woman with smaller breasts would be left alone to starve and die in the wilderness. What's so intelligent about that? And why do some women have small breasts? It's not fair. The evolution of the human female breast is all the proof one needs to debunk intelligent design. After all, if life was designed by someone with the ultimate in intelligence, all woman would have large breasts. ------------ About the author Mark Gelbart: My book, Talk Radio, is a black comedy about a radio talk show host who gets kidnapped and psychologically tortured by a loser. www.mark-gelbart.com Email: agelbart@aol.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|