Posted on 07/12/2005 10:28:43 AM PDT by Right Wing Professor
Nothing new there, eh?
If you're trying to save souls, perhaps you would be better served not wasting your time worrying about scientific theories that have nothing to do with souls, God or the afterlife.
""I don't believe that anything that offends nine-tenths of the American public should be taught in public schools. ..."
Hey wait a second!! I thought that, according to the oft-emailed, anti-PC-inspired "Bill of No Rights" that noone - NOT EVEN CHRISTIANS - have the Right To Not Be Offended in America?
Or does this hypocritically only apply to limp-wristed PC liberals and not Christians?
But since it's just one theory, I have no problem with them teaching ID as a theory either.
Only exception is ID is not a theory. It is only a hypothesis. It has a long way to go to become a theory.
"I wonder what these alleged "theories" are, and whether or not they're really scientific theories."
I'm more concerned with the focus on "how man was created". It indicates that people are still primarily concerned with the separation between them and the other animals. I have no understanding of why this would be so, but as long as people find it difficult to look at themselves as nothing more than some very intelligent animals, they will look for some verification of their "special" place in the universe. This may also be why the connection between abiogenesis and evolution will just not go away, both indicate a rather plain start to the human animal.
"I think that it also doesn't apply to people who support a flag protection amendment."
So there IS a group of Americans who have the right to Not Be Offended?
Which group do I need to be PC to now?
I watched a debate on C-Span a few weeks ago between a representative of the Discovery Institute and a scientist who was either on the school-board debating the recent policy changes in Kansas, or was a testifying witness in front of that verysame board (I can't remember which). I watched this because I always try to keep an open mind and make an attempt to listen to the views of others.
The representative of the Discovery Institute was asked to describe Creationism and he proceeded to describe it as a equally vaild Scientific Theory to the Theory of Evolution. He continued by presenting phenomenon that he claimed could not be accounted for by the Theory of Evolution but that could be, by the Theory of Creationism. When pressed about the Religious aspects of his views versus Scientific data he stated that Creationism was a Scientifc Theory. I have also seen this statement made here by Creationists: Creationism is NOT a Religion, it is a Scientific Theory.
HOWEVER, when criticism of this 'Theory' is raised it evokes the same effect on its adherents as if you were attacking their Religion. They bring up Religion.
I take it back then!........I'm NOT confused. IDer's are the ones that are confused!
Therefore, for the record, I'd like to state that when I put forth my firmly held belief that ID is a piece of CRAP, I'm commenting on the Science of Creationism and the suckers that would believe such claptrap.
I am NOT, however, making a comment on Religion since, as elaborated on by the Discovery Institute, Creationism "is a Science, NOT Religion".
Any further misconstruing of this is because the adherents of this 'Science' are the ones that are CONFUSED!
Not me!
"IDer's are the ones that are confused!"
Willfully so.
My view of it all is that creationism is a cult. It's often associated with some Christian denominations, but it's also associated with Islam, so to me it's a peculiar set of beliefs that can find cover, of sorts, in various religions. Or it might function as a stand-alone cult, with no connections to Christianity or Islam.
Creationism/ID most definitely isn't science. It has no theory, no data, no hope of any falsifying tests or observations, no research program, and no value to medicine, pharmachology, agriculture, forestry, etc. This is from The List-O-Links:
[C]ontemporary Muslim intellectuals like Harun Yahya put great emphasis on the case against materialism and its main pillar, Darwinism.[snip]
And recently they [intellectual Christians] have initiated a bold movement — a “wedge” as they call it — to split the foundations of materialism.
This “wedge” is the code name for the Intelligent Design Movement, formed in the early 1990s by Christian scientists and intellectuals. The leader of the movement is Phillip E. Johnson, a prominent professor of law from the University of California, Berkeley. During a sabbatical year in London in 1987, Dr. Johnson read about Darwinism and noticed that Darwinian ideologues like Richard Dawkins use deceptive arguments to sell their unsubstantiated story. He decided to dedicate the rest of life to unravel this sophisticated fallacy. His first book, Darwin on Trial (1991), annoyed the Darwinist establishment terribly, but it was just a beginning. In the following years, serious scientists like Michael Behe from Lehigh University, William Dembski from Baylor University, and Paul Nelson from the University of Chicago joined the ranks of the movement.
Today the movement, headed by the Discovery Institute in Seattle and the Intelligent Design Network in Kansas, is leading a great battle first to free school textbooks and then the whole of society from the Darwinist dogma and the materialist philosophy it supports.
Intelligent Design (ID) is a term that implies creation. The universe and life are not products of blind forces of nature, ID holds, but show evidence that they were designed by an intelligence. The ID Movement has deliberately chosen not to specify the identity of the Designer. Through science you can demonstrate convincingly that there is a designer, but you can’t go further without invoking theology. Everybody has the right to believe in a Designer according his own theology. What makes the movement effective is its emphasis on solid scientific evidence.
[snip]
Muslims should also note the great similarity between the arguments of the Intelligent Design Movement and Islamic sources. Hundreds of verses in the Qur’an call people to examine the natural world and see in it the evidence of God. Great Islamic scholars like Ghazali wrote large volumes about design in animals, plants, and the human body. What Intelligent Design theorists like Behe or Dembski do today is to refine the same argument with the findings of modern science.
In short, Intelligent Design is not alien to Islam. It is very much our cause, and we should do everything we can to support it.
Agreed.
It's scary to me that, not only will these clowns get on TV or in a State Educational Planning Commission and pass this stuff off as fact, but also that there are actually people that will believe them. [/Involuntary Shudder]
Notice not one of them believes in 7 day creation (or is it 6 day?)
And it didn't seem to me like any of them want ID to have equal footing with evolution.
What a craven kowtow to the mob and betrayal of intellectual integrity.
Ignorant, too. Evolution doesn't offend Christians. Truth cannot contradict truth.
Good one!
If I were a high school teacher, I could design a very interesting lesson plan using ID theory, the pepper moths, the Haeckel embryo drawings, and a few other things, as ways of teaching what it means to do science without fudging.
But they'd probably be throwing paper airplanes or sending text messages or whatever kids do in high school these days.
This one has always bugged me too. I wouldn't desecrate the flag for political purposes, but it is just a flag. Hey, if you ran out of diapers and all you had was a flag.....? Sorry Old Glory 8-).
There's a story about a Zen master who was snowed in during a bitter winter, and he had run out of firewood. After burning all the furniture, the only wooden thing left was a statue of Buddha. So he tossed it onto the fire. And lived. He was regarded as very wise.
Can you give an example or two of these new discoveries?
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.