Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

How do we know that the rock structures in Arabia are evidence of design?

Harrat Khaybar
apparent ancient human rock art/Harrat Khaybar, NASA

From Evolution News & Views:

Here we are in 2018, and we still don’t know who, when, or why ancient people left their marks in the Arabian desert in the form of large stone structures, some of them hundreds of meters long. But as we observed back in November, “All we know is that they were designed.” It’s a good example of intelligent design in action — the design science of archaeology. It’s one of many active areas of design-based research that clearly are propelling science forward.

What’s interesting is that there are very stunning natural structures in the same area: perfectly round volcanic craters that stand out vividly from their surroundings. So what’s the difference? We all know if we follow the Design Filter: we can observe natural causes forming craters, but we never see unguided natural processes forming gates, pendants, and wheels. More.

LiveScience slide show

Of course, Darwinians actually aren’t arguing about that anymore. They can’t. What they are claiming is that human consciousness is an illusion so you wouldn’t know if those gates, pendants, and wheels are designed or not. And you need your “science” betters to run your life.

See also: The illusion of consciousness sees through itself.


Mock at your peril! Naturalism is a jealous fraud

Those 'gates' are most likely farm fields divided by owners. Plowing and planting are most efficient in a long narrow rectangle. The circles could also be farm fields determined by radial irrigation systems. polistra
ppolish: We know that intelligent, self energy seeking and providing, nano-machine aggregate multi-ton walking machines ultimately formed from dirt because we can build a model that (often? sometimes?) predicts how they're stacked in it. Also, we know that dinosaur bones are actually the remains of these machines and aren't more immediate dirt formations because...well...I mean, it's obvious, look at them! LocalMinimum
Dinosaur bones are evidence of design. What, they just happened by oops? Come on. Molecular machines building bones by oops? Come on again. Who can believe that crud anymore? It’s 2018 not 1890 FCOL! ppolish
The claim that ID is a "pseudoscience" as per Wikipedia is bizarre. Designed objects exist in nature and obviously have quantifiable characteristics. To say otherwise is anti-science, anti-reason, anti-sanity. The quantifications described by Dembski and Behe are potentially falsifiable. That these quantifications exist in biology is also potentially falsifiable. Only an anti-science dogmatist would call ID a "pseudoscience." tribune7

Leave a Reply