Posted on 08/13/2005 3:49:15 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
The cover story of the August 15, 2005, issue of Time magazine is Claudia Wallis's "The evolution wars" -- the first cover story on the creationism/evolution controversy in a major national newsweekly in recent memory.
With "When Bush joined the fray last week, the question grew hotter: Is 'intelligent design' a real science? And should it be taught in schools?" as its subhead, the article, in the space of over 3000 words, reviews the current situation in detail. Highlights of the article include:
While Wallis's article is inevitably not as scientifically detailed as, for example, H. Allen Orr's recent article in The New Yorker, or as politically astute as, for example, Chris Mooney's recent article in The American Prospect, overall it accomplishes the important goal of informing the general reader that antievolutionism -- whether it takes the form of creation science, "intelligent design," or calls to "teach the controversy" -- is scientifically unwarranted, pedagogically irresponsible, and constitutionally problematic.
I don't define/explain the term theory. The Scientific Method does that for all true scientists. If you truly don't know, then I would suggest you find a good link or book on the Scientific Method. It would be possible to post it here, but I prefer not to waste time and space doing so. If you wish, I could freepmail a good discussion of the Scientific Method to your personal mailbox.
W.K.
Hey, hey, we're the Monkees, You never know where we'll be found. so you'd better get ready, We may be comin' to your town
pinging to one of the uglier threads I've seen lately....for later
This was just one flaw of many in post 98 by coyoteman. I just don't have the time to respond to them all.
By the way, it was the chicken who came first.
W.K. ;^)
With all your hyaenic laughter I assume you will be content to let science deal with the realms of direct observation and testing in real time if it is to retain its integrity. If, instead, you are willing to admit reasonable conjecture upon a static record to the table of science, then perhaps you ought give astrology its place at the table ahead of evolutionism (the notion that all current life forms are derivative of a common ancestral life form). Frankly, astrology has been around a lot longer and makes more sense. At least it deals with a certain amount of direct observation in real time.
It is refered to as ID theory
Martian creation legend:
"The First Born of Barsoom," he explained, "are the race of black
men of which I am a Dator, or, as the lesser Barsoomians would
say, Prince. My race is the oldest on the planet. We trace our
lineage, unbroken, direct to the Tree of Life which flourished in
the centre of the Valley Dor twenty-three million years ago.
"For countless ages the fruit of this tree underwent the gradual
changes of evolution, passing by degrees from true plant life to
a combination of plant and animal. In the first stages the fruit
of the tree possessed only the power of independent muscular action,
while the stem remained attached to the parent plant; later a brain
developed in the fruit, so that hanging there by their long stems
they thought and moved as individuals.
"Then, with the development of perceptions came a comparison of
them; judgments were reached and compared, and thus reason and the
power to reason were born upon Barsoom.
"Ages passed. Many forms of life came and went upon the Tree of
Life, but still all were attached to the parent plant by stems of
varying lengths. At length the fruit tree consisted in tiny plant
men, such as we now see reproduced in such huge dimensions in the
Valley Dor, but still hanging to the limbs and branches of the tree
by the stems which grew from the tops of their heads.
"The buds from which the plant men blossomed resembled large nuts
about a foot in diameter, divided by double partition walls into
four sections. In one section grew the plant man, in another a
sixteen-legged worm, in the third the progenitor of the white ape
and in the fourth the primaeval black man of Barsoom.
"When the bud burst the plant man remained dangling at the end of
his stem, but the three other sections fell to the ground, where the
efforts of their imprisoned occupants to escape sent them hopping
about in all directions.
"Thus as time went on, all Barsoom was covered with these imprisoned
creatures. For countless ages they lived their long lives within
their hard shells, hopping and skipping about the broad planet;
falling into rivers, lakes, and seas, to be still further spread
about the surface of the new world.
"Countless billions died before the first black man broke through
his prison walls into the light of day. Prompted by curiosity, he
broke open other shells and the peopling of Barsoom commenced.
"The pure strain of the blood of this first black man has remained
untainted by admixture with other creatures in the race of which
I am a member; but from the sixteen-legged worm, the first ape and
renegade black man has sprung every other form of animal life upon
Barsoom.
"The therns," and he smiled maliciously as he spoke, "are but the
result of ages of evolution from the pure white ape of antiquity.
They are a lower order still. There is but one race of true and
immortal humans on Barsoom. It is the race of black men.
"The Tree of Life is dead, but before it died the plant men learned
to detach themselves from it and roam the face of Barsoom with the
other children of the First Parent.
"Now their bisexuality permits them to reproduce themselves after
the manner of true plants, but otherwise they have progressed
but little in all the ages of their existence. Their actions and
movements are largely matters of instinct and not guided to any great
extent by reason, since the brain of a plant man is but a trifle
larger than the end of your smallest finger. They live upon
vegetation and the blood of animals, and their brain is just large
enough to direct their movements in the direction of food, and to
translate the food sensations which are carried to it from their
eyes and ears. They have no sense of self-preservation and so are
entirely without fear in the face of danger. That is why they are
such terrible antagonists in combat."
From "The Gods of Mars" (ERB)
That certainly is the popular refrain of the creationists. You state it like a matra.
Unfortunately it is nonsense and no one with an education above the 8th grade could possibly believe it.
Occassionally there are those on these threads that argue creationism and ID intelligently. Alamo-Girl and betty boop are examples.
This is not in that category.
"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
Guess the author, but no fair searching the internet.
Nite all
W.K.
Fine, I would agree to that provided you creationists would agree to putting the following other theories on an equal footing with ID:
Astrology
Alchemy
Palmistry
Reading tea leaves
Voodoo
Wiccan
etc.
What I don't understand about you creationists is that you seem to lack the basic discernment between a proper scientific theory and the halucinatory ravings of the Discovery Institue. They are not on the same level.
Yup, made me laugh pretty hard as well. :-)
Is this your way of demonstrating you don't understand what the issues are?
Please reveal the evidence that certain people born at a certain time of year are more egotistical than people born at another time of year because a certain configuration of stars kind of suggested the outline of a lion.
Or that other people born at another time of year were more sexual than other people born at another time of year because a certain configuration of stars kind of looked like a snake and a snake resembles a penis.
Please reveal the evidence done from personality studies on how some people born at a certain time of year are more stubborn than people born at other times of the year because a given configuration of stars kind of resembles a bull.
"Reasonable conjecture" is not science. Theories that attempt to explain existing evidence is. And there is absolutely no evidence that personality traits are concurrent with the perceived likeness of a configuration of stars as interpreted by a bunch of ignorant savages (non-christian - non Hebrew) a couple thousand years ago.
While were at it let's resurrect the Aztec practice of cutting the hearts out of people to appease the gods.
Hey, it just might stop global warming !!!
Oh, I know what the issues are, do you? (Typically, those that respond with cliched insults don't!) They're certainly not about whether or not evolution happened. That's a lame and old discussion to which we can contribute absolutely nothing here. No, the issues are how much we should trust man made ideas, ideologies, silly dogmas and self contained systems such as science itself. Happy puffing!
I would not go so far as to insist on every American Indian creation myth, or other rare and esoteric religions, but one can logically find in a court of law that failure to equally represent say, Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist and Shinto would be "unconstitutional"...
Yes, I do. I have demonstrated so. All you do is make rather childish rejoinders with silly images.
(Typically, those that respond with cliched insults don't!)
I don't resort to insults, and in the rare case that I do they are original and not cliches. Assertion Without Proof.
They're certainly not about whether or not evolution happened.
Since this is a thread about evolution, then what are you doing here?
No, the issues are how much we should trust man made ideas, ideologies, silly dogmas and self contained systems such as science itself.
Or how much we should trust mythologies that kept human beings in abject poverty for generations until science freed the human mind from "silly dogmas" to investigate the truth about the Universe and begin to understand it, so Man could learn to control it and rise out of that poverty.
Just because people make mistakes doesn't mean that science is invalid. Truth is, if we didn't have the advances of science we'd all still be knee deep in muck trying to figure out how to survive for our 35 or so years, like they do in so much of the 3rd world.
I remember reading that, long ago, and thinking how daring Burroughs had been to suggest, even in fiction, that the blacks were first, and other men are the result of a crossing between blacks and a white ape. Burroughs anticipated Farrakhan by a couple of generations at least. Link to somebody's fanciful painting.
You seem to be well versed in the weak science of astrology. Maybe you can explain the difference between "reasonable conjecture" and "theories that attempt to explain existing evidence." Neither constitute direct observation of current phenomena and testability in real time, which is part and parcel of science in the strict sense. If you think the essence of science is merely explaining the existing evidence (as revealed in geologic records and such), then it is no wonder you are willing to grant the philosophy of evolution "scientific" status in the classroom.
This is not exactly true. The concept of living vs non-living is a construct based on the fact that after three and a half billion years, it's pretty easy to distinguish the forms and products of life. As some evolution critics have said, if it's a protein, it was manufactured by a living thing.
What we do not know is the history of early life, and we do not know if there is an easy dividing line between mere chemicals and things that are obviously living. We do know that it is possible to make self-replicating molecules that are not related to living things. Self-replication is one of the hallmarks of life, and it is not difficult to find in relatively simple molecules.
Your statement is essentially so far off point that it is not even wrong.
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.
