Skip to comments.Santorum: Don't put intelligent design in classroom
Posted on 11/13/2005 3:49:41 PM PST by Crackingham
click here to read article
By the way you emphasized the word 'theory' is sounds like you think that theories are somewhat less than what should be taught. This shows a lack of understanding of how science works. No problem, this is common among creationists. Let me explain it to you.
Nothing in science is based on proof, or proofs, but on statistical analysis of evidence that provides us with a level of confidence that the theory is valid. So, number one, asking for proof is erroneous. Asking for evidence would be correct.
A theory is made up of a number of hypotheses, from one to however many are developed, that have been tested and found to give a high level of confidence. In other words, a theory has already been tested and verified. As you can see this pretty much is counter to your statement about 'unproven theories'.
I would strongly suggest otherwise and I think it's highly remiss for you to suggest that. ID is backed by facts coming out the wazoo. Evolution is nothing short of a theory well short on facts and data yet one that has simply been embraced, largely by people on the left, simply b/c their not embracing it indicts much of the basis for their thinking generally and particularly speaking.
I'll leave it for you to consider which ideology, conservatism or liberalism is the one that is short on facts, truth, and bases for their arguments and which is founded on truth, facts, and solid foundations for their arguments!
No, I really did not. I just don't see that these people are dictating any such religion to you or anyone else. And I don't see them doing it "despite" the scientific evidence, I see them doing it with it. Your argument presumes that they think nothing of science and that science has no place with God. I say thats nonsense.
|The CrevoSci Archive
Just one of the many services of Darwin Central
"The Conspiracy that Cares"
CrevoSci threads for the past week:
1999-11-22 Blood of Tyrants
1997-11-28 cd jones
|2000-11-02 Exit 109
2004-11-03 Grey Rabbit
2000-11-04 harbinger of doom
2000-11-28 HiTech RedNeck
2002-11-17 Just mythoughts
2003-11-18 little jeremiah
2000-11-19 Mike Fieschko
2004-11-24 mista science
2003-11-17 Nathan Zachary
2000-11-10 Patriotic Teen
Lost CrevoSci Battlefields (Pulled Threads)
Glossary of Terms
Assumption: Premise: a statement that is assumed to be true and from which a conclusion can be drawn; "on the assumption that he has been injured we can infer that he will not to play"
Belief: Any cognitive content (perception) held as true; religious faith
Crevo: Creation vs. evolution
CrevoSci: Creation vs. evolution/Science
CrevoSci Warriors: Those who take part on CrevoSci threads
Data: factual information, especially information organized for analysis or used to reason or make decisions
Dogma: a religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof
Fact: When an observation is confirmed repeatedly and by many independent and competent observers, it can become a fact
Freepday: The day a Freeper joined Free Republic
Hypothesis: A tentative theory about the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena; "a scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory"; "he proposed a fresh theory of alkalis that later was accepted in chemical practices"
Impression: A vague idea in which some confidence is placed; "his impression of her was favorable"; "what are your feelings about the crisis?"; "it strengthened my belief in his sincerity"; "I had a feeling that she was lying"
Law: A generalization that describes recurring facts or events in nature; "the laws of thermodynamics"
Observation: Any information collected with the senses
Theory: A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"
of Darwin Central
As I said in an earlier post, we're dealing with people who have no kinship to, no education in and no understanding of science. They insist, in their arguments here, that science conform to their uninformed beliefs.
I don't think God abandons people. I think people abandon God.
Yes, the fossil record is replete with evidence of evolving species.
Apparently not since all he appears to be is a Specter in training. The Dims certainly aren't going to support him.
What else would you expect it to be?
It should slice, dice and splice the genes of mutant mice. It should be a juicer and a boost my gas mileage to over 102 per gallon. I'd like to take it out to the zoo and buy it red balloons and funnel cake. And it should keep the ice cream in my fridge from going melty, cure hang-overs, clip my toe nails and walk the dog.
Thank God someones got some sense!!!!!!!!!!
I am already tired. People like you wear me out by refusing to understand what I am saying.
The message is timeless. It will be true a million years from now if the human race still exists. That is the point. It is ancient and it is timeless, some truths are eternal and have to be stated again and again.
I have no use for stupid people. They have murdered millions. Only logical, rational, ruthlessly truthful people are going to change anything.
Go have fun. You might grow up some day. Life is more than having fun.
Interesting, Evolution is a theory, has much evidence to support, and to suggest, but is not clearly and fully realized yet you believe in it. That DOES require some faith. Your faith is that the undiscovered will be discovered and answer the blanks. fill in the gaps, or to use a phrase fill in those "missing" links.
Don't lecture me on trashing of words and their meanings. You are conveniently predisposed to evolution being on solid enough ground as to be perfect in its presentation when it is still a work in much progress requiring more. Faith has meaning for you as well, here is your definition :Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
What this more than likely means is that Santorum really isn't that bright a bulb. It shows that he's likely not reasoned any of this out himself, even less reason to support him. If he had, then he'd not have changed his position.
I know of absolutely no one that upon reviewing the evidence pro/con for both theories in an intellectually honest and objective manner that has chosen evolution for any reason whatsoever.
You do know that ID means man evolved from a simple organism over millions of years ...
"Ah, this is just typical MSM pitting one religious person against another. Santorum is Catholic so he is pro-evolution."
Maybe Santorum reads to read THIS:
Further, he (the Pope) seems to be cautioning those who have been claiming Church endorsement of the full-bodied, design-defeating version of Darwin's theory of evolution, which, after all, is often little more than philosophical materialism applied to science, added Chapman.
Chapman noted that in his very first homily as Pope, Benedict XVI had rebuked the idea that human beings are mere products of evolution, and that, like his predecessor, John Paul II, the new Pope has a long record of opposition to scientific materialism.
excerpt from: http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=3015&program=News&callingPage=discoMainPage
It sure looks that way! I'm glad you've noticed.
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.