BrisbaneNorg

Intellijent Dezine

Intelligent design is proponed as an new science which teaches the existence of an intelligent designer. The nature of this designer is not specified, but it is paraleled with our mythology of gods and supernatural beings. It has been described as a pseudo science, because it cannot be tested with experimentation. As a person who has an IQ longer than most I'd like to share my opinion. Intelligent design pales next to scientific empiricism, it exists through reason but is not maintained by it.

The idea that the system will 'break down' without the presence of all parts as mentioned in irreducible complexity is seems to disable the fact that matter can take on many forms and has many states. If irreducible complexity exists then there is a flaw in the equation E=mc2 because there would be no external forces acting on a closed system and therefore there would be additional formula required to describe the presence of different non relative energies. Irreducible complexity forces the existence of an external force and thus the intelligent designer, but there is also a description of scientific flaw namely Einstein's formula is incomplete.

The second interesting aspect of Intelligent design is the idea of Scientific Method, since it is induced with logic, yet there are no experiments which confirm the scientific process for which it exists. We as human beings examine nature, and we see that it works, it works similar to the way that we as humans work, examine nature and derive our own parallels which connects the 'natural world' and the physical world. Science is a series of matches which connect the human experience with extensions of the cognitive field and until now these extensions have been verified through proof that the environment confirms what has been asserted through observation.

But Intelligent Design does not confirm through observation, it uses the unknown quantity of the universe, rather than the 'knowing quantity' (since some things are true and therefore so are many others) as described through science. The unknown quantity seems to make an assumption that science cannot, the quantum leap if you will, that the Universe is irreducibly complex. So it seems to be an induction / deduction paradox between scientific method and the methods described by Intelligent Design.

Intelligent design is induced using a non linear probability scale which places its association in a trinary or post binary logic system. This system of probability is called geometric probability, which reasons the existence of polygon systems superimposing fractal reductions and hence the Sierpinski triangle is a geometric representation of the binary probability scale. This is how geometric probability standardises the methods used by Intelligent Design, at infinity, binary probility is a perfectly working system, which falls within the trinary logical paradigm, and that is where Intelligent design fits into the scientific process.

For scientific design to be taught, geometric probability and probability remainder should first be taught in schools as mathematics. Since there is a tendency to 'get ahead of ourselves' or to attempt to jump too far with our quantum leaps. It also reasons the existence of God, not as a supernatural being, but as a remainder of probability, since there is a God, we should not substantiate it with anything less than truth, and if that truth is that we created god, then so be it, but ir remains with a statistical reality through probability remainder as a non linear item, the refutation is ignorance, rather than complete. Similarly the trinary logic paradigm helps describe the mathematical reality of the existence of both god and no God, for which atheism seems the perfect ideology, since by its very nature it describes both the existence of God and no god at all, since it is an 'exception to theism'.

But in terms of the Induction / Deduction paradox geometric probability is both, it seeks to place the entire system within a complex version of itself, commonly describe in mathematics as a fractal. But it therefore parodies relative and non relative energies and so Einstein's equation needs to be reworked. In this case, linear existence, we must put the context of trinary modulation with an evolutionary genetic origin since they are compresent, at every step trinary systems remonstrate binary completive, since a complete binary system requires the existence of a trinary system. It is similar with the equation E=mc2 describing relative energies, but the trinary system uses scalar energies, which we see in nature, but cannot describe, which pertain to the natural existence of trinary modules within nature. An irreducibly complexity is a module and not a system, since it is a trinary logical devision.

So does intelligent design exist? In my opinion there is a plausible process to analyze the validity of natural modules, rather than systems, for which irreducible complexity has a more reasonable application. There is evidence of intelligent survival mechanisms throughout human history, my opinion as to its metalogical reality as either evolution or intelligent design, we have necessarily moved beyond the binary paradox, since according to trinary logic and the presence of current natural modules, both or neither could be true.

To be honest though I'm sick of there only being two sides to this argument, in my opinion, life as we know it was a regurgitation of an intelligent system, rather than an intelligent design a remainder of an intelligent system. There, consider a third option, since intelligence does not necessarily exist as an act of an intelligent designer, just through the presence of an 'designing system' a propogation of prexisting process.