The Fake “Science” of Intelligent Design

The fake “science” of intelligent design claims to provide a reliable methodology for determining if something was “natural” or created through the intervention of an intelligent agent.

Yet somehow its proponents never actually apply it to cases of genuine interest, like this one.

Why is that?


  1. blf says

    The mildly deranged penguin — an expert on snow, ice, cheese, trebuchets, and everything else (she says) — claims that is characteristic of cretinists turning every which way to avoid seeing evidence. Any evidence, be it for evolution, a cheese-eating penguin, the total tastelessness & extreme danger of peas, that 1 + 2 = 5⅛, and so on. It’s unclear whether she’s talking about the patterns in the OP and/or the silence mentioned in the OP. Or possibly this comment?

  2. says

    Those aren’t even swirls. They’re contact lines where the ice pressurized and lifted up above the water (or bubbles formed depending on your perspective) The lines are from freeze/thaw cycles.

    Or, starfaring civilizations get really bored and troll stupid people.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *