Posted on 01/28/2009 11:36:17 AM PST by Coyoteman
We will see and hear the term “Darwinism” a lot during 2009, a year during which scientists, teachers, and others who delight in the accomplishments of modern biology will commemorate the 200th anniversary of Darwin’s birth and the 150th anniversary of the publication of On the Origin of Species. But what does “Darwinism” mean? And how is it used? At best, the phrase is ambiguous and misleading about science. At worst, its use echoes a creationist strategy to demonize evolution.
snip...
In summary, then, “Darwinism” is an ambiguous term that impairs communication even about Darwin’s own ideas. It fails to convey the full panoply of modern evolutionary biology accurately, and it fosters the inaccurate perception that the field stagnated for 150 years after Darwin’s day. Moreover, creationists use “Darwinism” to frame evolutionary biology as an ism or ideology, and the public understanding of evolution and science suffers as a result. True, in science, we do not shape our research because of what creationists claim about our subject matter. But when we are in the classroom or otherwise dealing with the public understanding of science, it is entirely appropriate to consider whether what we say may be misunderstood. We cannot expect to change preconceptions if we are not willing to avoid exacerbating them. A first step is eschewing the careless use of “Darwinism.”
(Excerpt) Read more at springerlink.com ...
Your comments suggesting I wasn't being nice to the person paying the bill, in reference to a post I made to another Freeper. The implication seems to be that the site owner gets to decide what is or isn't fair, and that being relevant to my questioning another poster on what they considered fair treatment of a question.
Just asking. If the referenced post looks like a fair assesment to you, then would it be accurate for me to say that CM was banned for believing in ToE?
Burning at the stake is persecution. Do you have the power to burn CoyoteMan at the stake? Did he ever complain that you were persecuting him?
So you're intolerant of things that you perceive as being intolerant. We can't have any intolerance, now can we?
Intolerance and discrimination are fine, if you do it for the proper reason. Do you value your freedom to discriminate?
There's different schools of thought on that. When Jesus says, "I am the Way, the Truth, the Life. No man comes to the Father but through me." that is pretty much claiming a monopoly on the truth. Would you oppose Him as well then?
Certainly. I am an atheist. I find it amusing that you are convinced that you have the "truth" because you believe in Christ.
Consequently when I see attacks against someones irrelevant beliefs (not having to do with their belief regarding freedom) I enjoy tossing rocks at their glass house.
Irrelevant to what? What irrelevant beliefs? Christianity? The ones which gave us this Constitution in the first place?
Irrelevant to all beliefs except the belief in freedom. Your belief in Christianity should be secondary to your belief in freedom. If you try and impose your beliefs on others (depriving them of freedom) don't complain when they try and impose their beliefs on you. Does the concept of freedom contradict your belief in Christ?
So you enjoy trolling against people who you think are wrong?
Yes. Although I prefer to think of it as a gentle nudge to try and get them to think and re-examine their belief. I appreciate it when I am forced to re think my belief too.
My question to you Metmom, and anyone else who might be interested, is what is your priority on Free Republic, freedom or your other beliefs?
Translate that please. Define *freedom* as you're using it and *other beliefs* as you're using it. Freedom to do what? Freedom from what? What "other beliefs"?
Freedom to be, to do (in an honorable fashion), to believe as one wishes. Is that clear enough? And for you I would assume that other belief would be Christianity. Is your belief in Christianity your primary belief? In other words does your belief in Christianity take precedence over all other considerations? It is understandable if you do, most Muslims put their religious beliefs above all other beliefs too. You have the freedom to put your priorities as you wish.
THANK YOU!!!!!!THANK YOU!!!!!!!!
We couldn't see that coming..../s
No, that would not be a fair assessment. He started throwing his weight around about who could and couldn't post on *his* thread.
When JR stepped in, cm foolishly mouthed back to him.
THAT'S what did him in....much as evos would like to believe otherwise.
And I'm sure he still got his wreath because, apparently, no evo will believe that it's for any other reason.
It's that persecution complex thing again.
As usual, not getting the definitions correct.
There’s a difference between real persecution and a persecution complex. He was not being actually persecuted. He was hysterical that he was going to be. That’s a persecution complex.
jello......nail.....wall.....
I unnnerstan. If I ever post as anyone else I’ll let you know.
just........wow.........
just.......wow........
You give a new meaning to Brownian motion.
IMHO, he’s passionate about his work, and that means he had an emotional attachment to the issue. He let somebody provoke him into an emotional response, and he paid for it.
Obviously the liberals posing as conservatives could care less, and those in the death grip of that cult are equally as hopeless, which, IMO leaves a very small number of people, by the looks of FR anyway.
*****************
What a surprise.
Um...my first question to someone who claims that Christianity belongs in public school (and I speak as someone who homeschools her daughter) is: who's version of Christianity? If I were to agree to a full-fledged endorsement of Christian involvement in public school, that is a basic resolution that has to be made, because I can already hear the screams of protest that Baptists would have against a RCCer teaching their children the 'evil Papist cult'. And already in this thread I have seen one or two attempts by FReepers to sneer at the public pronouncement of a religious leader (the Roman Catholic Pope) - which tells me they arent really interested in freedom of religion...just unchallenged access to their own particular interpretation. I would have objections to the Bible Literalists teaching my (Anglican) Catholic child that the concept of transubstantiation is a Bad Thing and a Lie. My child would be subject to their inconsistency and confused version of faith - if she is to believe in a Literal interpretation of Genesis, why is she then not allowed to not believe in a Literal command from Christ Himself to "take, eat, for this is My Body, which will be given up for you"?????
Do you see the problem *I* have with agreeing with Christians who say they are battling the scientists in the public sector???
At least in science, the TRUE scientific method, any inconsistencies are weeded out or given the ability to be vetted. If my Catholic child were to end up under the tutelage of a Protestant, what chance would she have except to be told that she is a Non-Believer?...which is what *I* am told ALL THE TIME by Literalists for accepting the scientific methodology behind the study of evolution. Once they start doing that, I am very much NOT inclined to give them any credence.
Well you be sure and let me know who did write that tagline and I’ll change it right away.
You know, once you provide indisputable proof, through sufficient peer review and the like.
GOOD RIDDANCE Coyoteman
Everything?
What are you doing on the internet, then? God didn't tell us how to build computers.
It’s written in plain English for even the slow to understand.
The last time I checked, Genesis was written in Hebrew, not English (though a number of people have made more-or-less accurate translations).
BTTT
Take your gear and go fishing somewhere else. I've made it plain to you what I think. I don't propose to defend the opinion of someone else. In my opinion 'yoteman expired from a self-inflicted wound. Quit your dancing and end this discussion.
I no longer believe they give a damn about the theory of evolution or even science, their emotional investment is in destroying traditional Judeo-Christian culture and replacing it with secularism and also promoting eugenics.
Its very sad because there is an incredible collection of bright education conservative folks with a lot of insight and humor at DC. Very, very sad, in fact.
I know what you mean. I stopped posting there due to some of the snobbish attitudes and the fixation on FR.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.