Saturday, July 16, 2011

cudworthless doesn't know when to shut up

On UD, thomas cudworth keeps going on and on and on about ID not being creationism and that Nick Matzke should agree with him and denounce any comparisons between ID and creationism, and denounce anyone who makes such comparisons. Here are just a few things cudworthless has said (my responses below are in bold type):

cuddy-boi: "There is no need to abandon miracles because miracles are not part of ID. ID detects design. It does not detect the means of insertion of design. It’s theoretically neutral between miraculous and non-miraculous means of insertion. And I’m talking about ID as it currently stands at its theoretical purest and best. If Johnson or anyone else 15 years ago said or implied that ID required miracles, that tells us one person’s view back then; it’s not part of formal ID theory now. ID now speaks of intelligent causes, not supernatural causes; it has ways of testing for intelligent input, but no way of testing for supernatural input."

Yeah, right. You're so full of shit that it's gushing out of your ears. ID is ALL about supernatural bullshit and miracles and other religious nonsense. Do you ever actually read the articles and comments by the IDiots on UD and other sites? Substituting the word "intelligent" for "supernatural" doesn't change the fact that ID is a form of religious creationism. Nice try, but it won't work.

"purest and best"?? You've got to be joking! ID 'theory' is a scam, and there's nothing pure or best about it. The whole thing is just a dishonest ploy in an attempt to force bogus religious crap into science and every aspect of everyone's life.

cuddy-boi: "I’m not interested in who represents ID as a “movement.” That’s a matter of politics."

Oh come on! Virtually everything you've brought up has to to with who represents ID as a movement, and who represents evolutionary theory, and how they're both represented. Read your own words you dumbass liar!

cuddy-boi: "I don’t agree with those ID proponents who cast ID as supernaturalism vs. naturalism. It shows category confusion."

Then you don't agree with virtually all of the IDiots. And if you're so concerned about purity, honesty, and how the ID movement is represented, you better get busy telling all your IDiot comrades that they're thoroughly confused.

By the way cuddy-boi, exactly how does ID 'detect design'?