Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ayatollahs in the classroom [Evolution and Creationism]
Berkshire Eagle (Mass.) ^ | 22 January 2005 | Staff

Posted on 01/22/2005 7:38:12 AM PST by PatrickHenry

A movement to drag the teaching of science in the United States back into the Dark Ages continues to gain momentum. So far, it's a handful of judges -- "activist judges" in the view of their critics -- who are preventing the spread of Saudi-style religious dogma into more and more of America's public-school classrooms.

The ruling this month in Georgia by Federal District Judge Clarence Cooper ordering the Cobb County School Board to remove stickers it had inserted in biology textbooks questioning Darwin's theory of evolution is being appealed by the suburban Atlanta district. Similar legal battles pitting evolution against biblical creationism are erupting across the country. Judges are conscientiously observing the constitutionally required separation of church and state, and specifically a 1987 Supreme Court ruling forbidding the teaching of creationism, a religious belief, in public schools. But seekers of scientific truth have to be unnerved by a November 2004 CBS News poll in which nearly two-thirds of Americans favored teaching creationism, the notion that God created heaven and earth in six days, alongside evolution in schools.

If this style of "science" ever took hold in U.S. schools, it is safe to say that as a nation we could well be headed for Third World status, along with everything that dire label implies. Much of the Arab world is stuck in a miasma of imam-enforced repression and non-thought. Could it happen here? Our Constitution protects creativity and dissent, but no civilization has lasted forever, and our current national leaders seem happy with the present trends.

It is the creationists, of course, who forecast doom if U.S. schools follow a secularist path. Science, however, by its nature, relies on evidence, and all the fossil and other evidence points toward an evolved human species over millions of years on a planet tens of millions of years old [ooops!] in a universe over two billion years in existence [ooops again!].

Some creationists are promoting an idea they call "intelligent design" as an alternative to Darwinism, eliminating the randomness and survival-of-the-fittest of Darwinian thought. But, again, no evidence exists to support any theory of evolution except Charles Darwin's. Science classes can only teach the scientific method or they become meaningless.

Many creationists say that teaching Darwin is tantamount to teaching atheism, but most science teachers, believers as well as non-believers, scoff at that. The Rev. Warren Eschbach, a professor at Lutheran Theological Seminary in Gettysburg, Pa., believes that "science is figuring out what God has already done" and the book of Genesis was never "meant to be a science textbook for the 21st century." Rev. Eschbach is the father of Robert Eschbach, one of the science teachers in Dover, Pa., who refused to teach a school-board-mandated statement to biology students criticizing the theory of evolution and promoting intelligent design. Last week, the school district gathered students together and the statement was read to them by an assistant superintendent.

Similar pro-creationist initiatives are underway in Texas, Wisconsin and South Carolina. And a newly elected creationist majority on the state board of education in Kansas plans to rewrite the entire state's science curriculum this spring. This means the state's public-school science teachers will have to choose between being scientists or ayatollahs -- or perhaps abandoning their students and fleeing Kansas, like academic truth-seekers in China in the 1980s or Tehran today.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: antitheist; atheistgestapo; chickenlittle; creationism; crevolist; cryingwolf; darwin; evolution; governmentschools; justatheory; seculartaliban; stateapprovedthought; theskyisfalling
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300 ... 1,101-1,106 next last
To: balrog666

It's the "establishment of religion" on public land quasi-issue pertaining to the Danbury Letter.

Now, Balrog, back to my question. Should Bibles and prayer be allowed in schools, or should all Korans be banned from campus--along with all stories of the mythological Roman and Greek gods, etc? Answer me, please, exactly what is your position and why?


201 posted on 01/22/2005 3:20:05 PM PST by The Spirit Of Allegiance (AHEM Useful Idiots: YOU are the REDS. You and your Red-Stream Media. True America is BLUE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
Why should you as an atheist have more rights than I do as a Christian?

I don't, the 1st Amendment protects my right to not practice religion as much as it protects your right to practice.

This country was founded by Christians. To deny that is to deny the truth.

I don't. Though I will debate their piety with you any day of the week.

If you study history, you know although there was no official church, society was based on the beliefs of Christians.

American law and society was (and still is) based on English common law, most of which is designed to define and protect property rights.

Who are you to change my country's history and try to deny its foundation?

It's my country too, compadre. Excercising my rights to be free from religion in the public sphere is neither denying history nor denying the foundations of my country. Rather, I think of it as honoring the Constitution and the men who wrote it.

The first school systems were Bible-based as were the first colleges.

Interesting, but not pertinent.

This country was founded to honor God.

I disagree. It was to give good men a chance to live free of tyrrany.

The Constitution only prohibits Congress from establishing a religion as the "official" religion.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." In mandating the teaching of ID, or otherwise intruding on religious grounds into the teaching of a public school class creates a situation where Congress is making a law respecting the establishment of religion.

Congress has not established any religion by local governments allowing religious expression by Christians.

Local governments are as bound by the Constitution as the Federal government is. Local laws violating the 1st Amendment are equally as unconstitutional.

You would bend history itself to conform to your non-belief.

You would bend the Constitution to conform to your beliefs.

You didn't answer my earlier questions.

202 posted on 01/22/2005 3:20:10 PM PST by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey
"Here we go AGAIN! You don't postulate a theory. You postulate a hypothesis and then a hypothesis becomes a theory AFTER substantial observations verify the validity of the hypothesis."

No, it's not "here we go again." You've failed to comprehend to what I replied.

The claim was that *theory* was the closest possible thing to the truth. I corrected the poster by pointing out that reality, actual observations of facts in the wild and in the lab, is/are much closer to the truth than mere postulations of a theory to an audience, no matter how well thought said theory may be.

Thus, the observations of the truth, when accurate, are considered more precise than theoritical ramblings.

203 posted on 01/22/2005 3:20:22 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Blurblogger
The sun HAD to be larger. It's on fire!

Doth thou trolleth?

204 posted on 01/22/2005 3:27:06 PM PST by Oztrich Boy (Not a tag line)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: js1138; PatrickHenry; NJ Neocon
The creationist attempt to "diversify" the science curriculum is at its heart no different than the attempt by the liberals to "diversify" the history and English curriculums with "feminist," "Afrocentric" or so help me, "queer-positive" additions. It's based not just on a disregard for people who happen to have different beliefs or values, but a complete disregard for facts, and an abject refusal to look straight at the truth and say "OK, this is how things are. I'm, just going to have to deal with it".

Hmmmm...they're also very much like those protestors at the inagural.

205 posted on 01/22/2005 3:28:24 PM PST by RightWingAtheist (Marxism-the creationism of the left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
Why all of a sudden must God be kicked out of schools and other institutions?

I support prayer in schools. I think the more Christianty in schools, the better (although I'm sensitive to how Jews think about this). And within a reasonable interpretation of the First Amendment.

But there just is no reason to believe that Genesis procribes Evolution, except in some peoples interpretations that I don't agree with.

And Evolution, despite all the bleating around here, I am firmly convinced as fact. I do not want to teach children false science, merely to ease the sensibilities of a few fundamentalist Christians (you do realize that the Catholic church and other major denominations do not have a problem with Evolution).

God does not manhandle the earth in its orbit around the sun. And I don't believe that Genesis says that God zapped man into existence in 6 litteral days. Gravity and orbital mechanics (created by God) takes care of the planet, and Evolution (created by God) takes care of life.

No problem.

206 posted on 01/22/2005 3:29:14 PM PST by narby ( A truly Intelligent Designer, would have designed Evolution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
I'm seriously worried that Creationism has the potential to destroy the Republican party. As I've said before, this issue will hang like an albatross around our necks. And that's why I think these threads are so important.

I agree. The problem is, I don't think science alone is going to convince evangelicals to drop this issue. They will reject whatever scientific argument you give them so long as they believe evolution conflicts with Christianity. That's why we need to focus on how the two are compatible. Unfortunately, I don't see too much progress being made on this front.

207 posted on 01/22/2005 3:33:09 PM PST by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey
"Oh, you mean that debunked probability analysis that assumes there is no order to nature and that everything is totally random."

You've seen no math to "debunk" the link that I provided, I assure you, though if you disagree you are welcome to post such math (you won't).

Likewise, you've failed to correctly characterize the debate. Big shock.

I'll do it for you (this is like being the teacher who gave you the answers to your tests in advance).

There are two possibilites:

1. That the origin of species is due to an unaided, unintelligent, natural process or processes... or

2. That the origin of species is due to an aided, intelligent intervention of some sort.

Those are your only two choices. There are no others, though it is *feasible* that both may be valid (at this point, we don't know).

This does *not* mean, as you incorrectly stated above, that everything must be "random." In fact, mathematically, we already know that there must be some form of bias. This bias may turn out to be from a natural process and/or from an intelligent intervention (i.e. one or both of options 1 and 2 above).

208 posted on 01/22/2005 3:34:30 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy

"Doth thou trolleth?"

Mainly I fish from the shore.

You?


209 posted on 01/22/2005 3:38:14 PM PST by The Spirit Of Allegiance (AHEM Useful Idiots: YOU are the REDS. You and your Red-Stream Media. True America is BLUE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: Alacarte
So much that they will pretend they don't understand the semantics of the word 'theory' simply not to disturb their beliefs?

And some pretend that they haven't yet had the explanation of what is "theory" and what is "fact".

My example of "Music Theory" classes in college certianly should have swayed most open minded. But some around here want to impose their own definitions on science, and they're sticking with it.

Believe what you want, but you're still wrong.

210 posted on 01/22/2005 3:39:52 PM PST by narby ( A truly Intelligent Designer, would have designed Evolution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

I interpret the Constitution literally, just as I interpret the Bible literally. And I don't believe there is such thing as an atheist - just humans who imagine they are greater than God. The federal government has no business in local school matters. The Department of Education should be abolished and all powers and responsibilities for education returned to the states.


211 posted on 01/22/2005 3:41:25 PM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

Comment #212 Removed by Moderator

To: WildTurkey
"Please prove your claim that abiogenesis teachings state that their [sic] is no "aid"."

There are 2 possibilities that I claim, not just 1.

One possibility is that abiogenesis was unaided.

The other possibility is that abiogenesis is aided.

Rasmussen's current experiment at Los Alamos is attempting to prove that the first possibility above is feasible.

In contrast, we've *already* proven that aided abiogenesis is possible (e.g. computer viri, self-replicating machines, cloning, etc.).

213 posted on 01/22/2005 3:44:21 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
"If you think calculating the probability of life's origin gives a precise scientific origin, guy, they sure didn't do a good job teaching it in your school."

On the contrary, math gives wonderfully precise answers.

214 posted on 01/22/2005 3:48:42 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: norton
Last I heard a theory was a hypothesis that seems to work, may have some gaps in it, and has not been proved or disproved.

You heard wrong. In science, a theory has already met the criteria of being tested, and being consistent with the available data. It is an order of magnitude up from hypothesis.

215 posted on 01/22/2005 3:49:03 PM PST by Junior (FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Blurblogger
Should Bibles and prayer be allowed in schools, or should all Korans be banned from campus--along with all stories of the mythological Roman and Greek gods, etc? Answer me, please, exactly what is your position and why?

Not in science classes.

216 posted on 01/22/2005 3:49:30 PM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852

I'm open to any possibilities that meet the criteria of being a scientific theory. ID does not yet do that.


217 posted on 01/22/2005 3:49:51 PM PST by Junior (FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
And I don't believe there is such thing as an atheist - just humans who imagine they are greater than God.

Which God?
218 posted on 01/22/2005 3:50:47 PM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: metacognative

We post the links to show our sources. That way, anyone who wants to can check our claims. Creationists often forget to "footnote" their work.


219 posted on 01/22/2005 3:51:04 PM PST by Junior (FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Seek

Let me clarify: the science-only aspect is a subset of the larger question of religion on campus/the purported Establishment Clause.

I do not contend that Greek mythology is taught as science. Nor do I contend that creation should be taught as science. I contend that evolution should NOT be taught as science in that it is neither proven nor replicable. (IMO, in the same speculative class as Creationism. BTW, I am glad to know of real Missing Links in the 'fossil record'...)

Now back to the other issue. Seek: Do you contend prayer and Bibles on campus are OK, or do you discriminate against the Jews and Christians while finding the Koran, other Eastern religions and occultic books and practices OK?


220 posted on 01/22/2005 3:55:33 PM PST by The Spirit Of Allegiance (AHEM Useful Idiots: YOU are the REDS. You and your Red-Stream Media. True America is BLUE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: Junior
"I'm open to any possibilities that meet the criteria of being a scientific theory. ID does not yet do that."

You are mistaken. Intelligent Design *already* explains, correctly, the process behind the creation of artificially intelligent software, self-replicating machines, computer viri, etc.

221 posted on 01/22/2005 3:55:44 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: balrog666

Should Bibles and prayer be allowed in schools outside of science classes?


222 posted on 01/22/2005 3:56:31 PM PST by The Spirit Of Allegiance (AHEM Useful Idiots: YOU are the REDS. You and your Red-Stream Media. True America is BLUE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: Blurblogger
Should Bibles and prayer be allowed in schools outside of science classes?

What has that got to do with what is taught in science classes?

223 posted on 01/22/2005 4:03:13 PM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies]

To: Southack
You are mistaken. Intelligent Design *already* explains, ...

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA!

ID/IOT explains nothing. Ever. That is why it exists.

224 posted on 01/22/2005 4:04:25 PM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
"ID/IOT explains nothing."

You are mistaken. Of course, you are welcomed and encouraged to show another theory *besides* Intelligent Design to explain how artificially intelligent software was formed, or how computer viri were made, or how self-replicating machines were built, etc.

Not that you can...

225 posted on 01/22/2005 4:11:08 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: Blurblogger
Michael Newdow, the ACLU and evolutionists be (in such a case) so pathologically focused on such a consuming, pathetic, quixotic mission as merely eliminating prayer in schools, banishing public crosses, seeking the removal of Ten Commandments from courthouses and "Under God" from our Pledge of Allegiance?

Are you in such a need of a boogy man to oppose that you fail to see the difference between those of us who have nothing against Christianity, we just don't want children taught false science. We believe in the truth, and Newdow and his ilk have nothing to do with it.

I believe that this ID stuff has the potential to do great damage to Christianity. Science and the elite classes have ignored religion for years. But ID is picking a fight with them and they are reacting. Can Christianity handle genuine attacks? And I mean genuine attacks, not just eliminating prayer in schools.

What happens when professors actively challenge the faith of students? How many will reject their faith under such direct attacks? Some will, for sure.

Christians are provoking this issue. Not the other way round. I'm afraid this will do great damage to Christianity. If I were genuinely against God and religion, I would keep my mouth shut and let the damage occur. But I genuinely support what Christians are doing, and I don't want to see the carnage that will result in this war of faith.

Christians will lose. Big time.

226 posted on 01/22/2005 4:12:45 PM PST by narby ( A truly Intelligent Designer, would have designed Evolution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Blurblogger
Estimates about its probable reduction in size (estimated only about 1% over estimated millions/BILLIONS of years, etc.) are ESTIMATES--some including I would say biased to fit a particular set of presuppositions.

No, they are the result of calculations, not estimates. First of all, they represent an upper bound on the mass loss (not change in size) a star can undergo during the "life" of a star. That calculation comes from the maximum energy conversion available via the various nuclear reactions that take place in a star such as the sun, and would only be that large if the entire supply of hydrogen in the sun were fused into heavier nuclei, which can't happen because most of the hydrogen in the star lies in regions outside of the fusion reaction zone. Most stars switch to helium burning after about 10% of the hydrogen is fused, which for the sun should be in about another 5 billion years.

The point is that the mass change of a star such as the sun is exquisitely small, and hence the change in gravitation is also minute.

What is difficult to understand is that if you are interested enough in the subject to have formulated "your own hypothesis" that stars are burning fuel like giant furnaces, why didn't you do some simple research on the subject on the internet to discover that hypothesis could not possibly be true? The text book I cited for you gives a wonderful discussion of the arguments that refute all sources of energy in stars (including chemical reactions, as you proposed) as being adequate other than fusion reactions.

227 posted on 01/22/2005 4:13:15 PM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
Should Bibles and prayer be allowed in schools outside of science classes?

What has that got to do with what is taught in science classes?

(Blurblogger realizes the impossibility of seeking to nail Jell-O to the wall, shrugs, walks away)
228 posted on 01/22/2005 4:15:30 PM PST by The Spirit Of Allegiance (AHEM Useful Idiots: YOU are the REDS. You and your Red-Stream Media. True America is BLUE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies]

To: longshadow

Thanks for your link. The topic is of interest and I'll save it for future reference.


229 posted on 01/22/2005 4:18:52 PM PST by The Spirit Of Allegiance (AHEM Useful Idiots: YOU are the REDS. You and your Red-Stream Media. True America is BLUE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: Southack

But it doesn't explain biological processes, and that's what we're talking about here.


230 posted on 01/22/2005 4:26:36 PM PST by Junior (FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

Comment #231 Removed by Moderator

To: Oztrich Boy
Blurblogger certainly says something about the effectiveness of education:

The sun HAD to be larger. It's on fire!

232 posted on 01/22/2005 4:27:34 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: Junior
"But it doesn't explain biological processes, and that's what we're talking about here."

What specifically makes you claim that?

233 posted on 01/22/2005 4:30:21 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: NJ Neocon

Tell me when scientific evidence was in 'opposition'.
[besides, that is, to darwinite beliefs.]


234 posted on 01/22/2005 4:30:51 PM PST by metacognative (follow the gravy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: narby; Liz
But ID is picking a fight with them and they are reacting. Can Christianity handle genuine attacks? And I mean genuine attacks, not just eliminating prayer in schools.

What happens when professors actively challenge the faith of students? How many will reject their faith under such direct attacks? Some will, for sure.

Christians are provoking this issue.

There has been a nonstop virulent attack on Christianity for 80+ years. Thomas Dewey, Freud, Marx, Darwin and others "rule from the grave" as has been said. These are indeed genuine attacks, always have been as far back as the Scopes trial and earlier....Some teachers and professors constantly challenge the faith of students daily....I experienced it myself in the mid-1970s in college....the Christians are reacting in united ways now to turn back the tide and this is what is causing the tension...until the past few years, resistance to the NEA and its agendae was ineffective as Christians were in denial or apathy. The times have changed and there is sunlight being shined on the vampire.... That said, I do not want the pendulum to swing too far the other way, thus hurting the Conservatives, the Republicans and the Christians, jointly or severally. In fact, I pray that we exercise the utmost wisdom in being retro-change-agents, with Grace and Truth.
235 posted on 01/22/2005 4:31:09 PM PST by The Spirit Of Allegiance (AHEM Useful Idiots: YOU are the REDS. You and your Red-Stream Media. True America is BLUE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: Southack; Right Wing Professor
On the contrary, math gives wonderfully precise answers.

And in science classes you can learn that precision and accuracy are not the same.

236 posted on 01/22/2005 4:31:54 PM PST by Oztrich Boy (Not a tag line)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: js1138
It's on fire!

Big fire in sky. Oook, oook!

And these people want to decide what gets taught in science classes.

237 posted on 01/22/2005 4:32:36 PM PST by PatrickHenry (<-- Click on my name. The List-O-Links for evolution threads is at my freeper homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: Junior
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/370035.stm

Sci/Tech

Biological computer prototype unveiled


The model shows how a biological computer could work

By BBC News Online Science Editor Dr David Whitehouse

A large-scale prototype of a computer that could be smaller than a living cell has been designed by an Israeli scientist.

Some scientists believe that, in the future, small biological computers could roam our bodies monitoring our health and correcting any problems they may find.

The prototype has been developed by Professor Ehud Shapiro of the Computer Science Department at the Weizmann Institute of Science.


[ image: Ehud Shapiro hopes new biotechnology will make his computer possible]
Ehud Shapiro hopes new biotechnology will make his computer possible
It is being presented at the Fifth International Meeting on DNA-Based Computers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

In terms of the logic on which it operates, the prototype will behave in a similar way to molecules inside a living cell, a "biomolecular machine".

A living computer

Each cell of our bodies is a collection of machines made out of biological molecules. These molecules can form pulleys and gears to move other molecules around the cell.

Some molecules have the ability to assemble and take apart other molecules. Others gather small molecules and use a template to construct new molecules.

In a sense, each of our cells is a complicated city of biological machines all working together.

It is possible that a future biomolecular version of Professor Shapiro's device could lead to the construction of computers, smaller than a single cell, and with the ability to monitor and modify them.

238 posted on 01/22/2005 4:34:40 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: Southack
On the contrary, math gives wonderfully precise answers.

Math give precision, but only answers the question asked. No one can ask the question needed to settle the question of abiogenesis, because no one knows what steps are necessary and sufficient. No one assumes that DNA and proteins just poofed into existence in one step, and no one (yet) knows the steps necessary. And no one knows if these steps lead naturally to each other. We do know it is possible to synthesize self-replicating molecules that are much less complex that proteins and DNA. This doesn't solve the problem, but it suggests the universe is inherently biased towards self-replication.

239 posted on 01/22/2005 4:36:55 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: Blurblogger
There has been a nonstop virulent attack on Christianity for 80+ years. Thomas Dewey, Freud, Marx, Darwin and others "rule from the grave

No, I'm afraid you don't realize what a real attack against faith would be. I don't know, but it would not surprise me if Newdow was motivated by opposition to ID. He is only the beginning.

Christians are doing the provoking here. This will not be pretty.

240 posted on 01/22/2005 4:38:19 PM PST by narby ( A truly Intelligent Designer, would have designed Evolution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

After having experienced a few of the evolution religion exchanges ...it is obvious that the darwin cult is the most hysterical, desperate and defensive. All the other sides are doing the Lord's work to show them the light.
But don't expect the willingly blind to see.


241 posted on 01/22/2005 4:39:25 PM PST by metacognative (follow the gravy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: Seek
If you don't want creation OR evolution to be taught as science, than what DO you want taught when it comes to that subject?

TEACHER:
"OK class, today we are going to start discussion of two quasi-scientific belief systems pertaining to the origin of the universe and the origin of the species. Some people believe one way, some believe the other way--and some believe in a combination of the two. We are going to look at the origins of the belief systems and what some leaders say about each of the two, for and against, so you can make up your own minds."

< humor on
And for lab work, we will dissect one of each
< / humor off

242 posted on 01/22/2005 4:40:29 PM PST by The Spirit Of Allegiance (AHEM Useful Idiots: YOU are the REDS. You and your Red-Stream Media. True America is BLUE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: narby
Christians will lose. Big time.

That, and tghe fact that conservatism is already losing many potential converts, is why some of us post.

If you insist that ID gets mentioned in school, teachers are going to challenge students to find examples of research that supports it. Other than the bogus probability argument there isn't any.

243 posted on 01/22/2005 4:41:06 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: Junior
"being consistent with a significant amount of the available data.

Neither proven nor unproven.

244 posted on 01/22/2005 4:41:49 PM PST by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: js1138
"Math give precision, but only answers the question asked. No one can ask the question needed to settle the question of abiogenesis, because no one knows what steps are necessary and sufficient."

Probability Math tells us that the odds of intelligently sequencing data into a specific order is usually 1.

That same math also shows that the probability of correctly sequencing billions of genetic programming instructions without any aid/bias is 0, given any amount of time less than infinity (e.g. the 17 billion years of our universe's existence).

This doesn't tell us that abiogenesis was aided or unaided, but it does show that there has to be some bias (either natural or intelligent) of some form to sequence so many instructions correctly.

245 posted on 01/22/2005 4:42:32 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies]

To: norton
Neither proven nor unproven.

Nothing in science is ever proven.
246 posted on 01/22/2005 4:44:17 PM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: js1138
"If you insist that ID gets mentioned in school, teachers are going to challenge students to find examples of research that supports it."

Such examples abound. Intelligent Design correctly explains the creation of computer viri, artifically intelligent software, self-replicating machines, cloning, etc.

247 posted on 01/22/2005 4:44:39 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 243 | View Replies]

To: Blurblogger; narby; Liz
Dave Breese break

There has been a nonstop virulent attack on Christianity for 80+ years. Thomas Dewey, Freud, Marx, Darwin and others "rule from the grave" as has been said. These are indeed genuine attacks, always have been as far back as the Scopes trial and earlier....Some teachers and professors constantly challenge the faith of students daily....

You Might Be a Fundamentalist If...

248 posted on 01/22/2005 4:45:34 PM PST by Oztrich Boy (Not a tag line)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: norton
Oh, and:
"I'm open to any possibilities that meet the criteria of being a scientific theory. ID does not yet do that.

Holding the door open a little bit?
Does that not allow for discussion of the two without the demagoguery?

249 posted on 01/22/2005 4:46:06 PM PST by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: metacognative
All the other sides are doing the Lord's work to show them the light...

Is lying part of the Lord's work? What do you say to the manufactured quotations found on dozens of the most popular creationism web sites?

250 posted on 01/22/2005 4:46:34 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300 ... 1,101-1,106 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson