Darwinist Ideologues Are on the Run

Human Events Online ^ | Jan 31, 2006 | Allan H. Ryskind

[Sweetjustusnow]

The two scariest words in the English language? Intelligent Design! That phrase tends to produce a nasty rash and night sweats among our elitist class.

Should some impressionable teenager ever hear those words from a public school teacher, we are led to believe, that student may embrace a secular heresy: that some intelligent force or energy, maybe even a god, rather than Darwinian blind chance, has been responsible for the gazillions of magnificently designed life forms that populate our privileged planet.

[ShadowAce]

Do you consider bacteria sexual or asexual?

Given that Bacteria usually reproduce by simply dividing in two and from Encyclopedia.com:" Reproduction is chiefly by binary fission, cell division yielding identical daughter cells. Some bacteria reproduce by budding or fragmentation.", I would say that they reproduce asexually.

[101st-Eagle]

Right, it's not religion, it's just a supernatural entity that operates outside physical laws. Gotcha.

Can you define "physical law?" Will said law be the same 100 years from now given further discovery? Through history things just always seem to be changing; quantum physics being a good example.

"The true wiseman is the one who realizes he knows nothing-Socrates

[Junior]

The Conspiracy That Cares

Corrupting the World's Youth Since 1859

---

January 31, 2006

The CrevoSci Archive

Since June 25, 1999

---

Keyword Searches

• CREATION
• CREATIONISM
• CREVO
• CREVOLIST
• DARWIN
• DARWINISM
• EVOLUTION
• EVOLUTIONISM
• INTELLIGENT DESIGN
• SCIENCE

---

Links

• List-O-Links

---

Box Scores
(All values subject to change)

Year	Threads	Daily Avg.
1999	42	0.12
2000	120	0.33
2001	255	0.70
2002	356	0.98
2003	467	1.28
2004	399	1.09
2005	1366	3.74
2006	164	5.29
Totals	3169	1.31

---

Lost Threads	%
43	1.4

---

Participants	Banned	%
1034	110	10.6

---

Freepdays

1. [2000-01-18] 2banana
   
2. [2001-01-24] agenda_express
   
3. [2002-01-26] ALS
   
4. [1999-01-23] Antiwar Republican
   
5. [1998-01-19] BB2
   
6. [1999-01-26] Bernard Marx
   
7. [1998-01-21] Cameron
   
8. [1999-01-24] Cautor
   
9. [2000-01-03] Condorman
   
10. [2003-01-17] conservativecorner
    
11. [2006-01-03] Creationist
    
12. [2003-01-16] cyborg
    
13. [2002-01-12] Dajjal
    
14. [2000-01-26] DallasMike
    
15. [2000-01-08] Deadeye Division
    
16. [2003-01-31] Diddley
    
17. [2003-01-23] El Laton Caliente
    
18. [2000-01-11] exnavy
    
19. [2005-01-30] From many - one.
    
20. [2005-01-03] Fruit of the Spirit
    
21. [2003-01-23] ganeshpuri89
    
22. [1999-01-29] Gritty
    
23. [1999-01-31] Hacksaw
    
24. [1998-01-16] holly
    
25. [2005-01-17] isaiah55version11_0
    
26. [2005-01-21] JCRoberts
    
27. [2002-01-02] Jeff Gordon
    
28. [2001-01-31] JMFoard
    
29. [2001-01-24] Just another Joe
    
30. [2000-01-07] Keyes2000mt
    
31. [2002-01-14] Lost Highway
    
32. [2005-01-27] manny613
    
33. [1999-01-04] Map Kernow
    
34. [1999-01-31] Mark Felton
    
35. [1999-01-25] Matchett-PI
    
36. [2004-01-16] mc6809e
    
37. [2002-01-17] MEGoody
    
38. [2005-01-20] MHalblaub
    
39. [2002-01-22] mikegi
    
40. [2003-01-21] Mikey_1962
    
41. [1999-01-31] Mr.Clark
    
42. [2004-01-08] orionblamblam
    
43. [2002-01-02] Oxylus
    
44. [2003-01-25] Prolixus
    
45. [2005-01-05] Right Wing It
    
46. [2000-01-31] RoughDobermann
    
47. [1999-01-22] Rudder
    
48. [2000-01-21] SJackson
    
49. [2003-01-06] skinkinthegrass
    
50. [1999-01-31] Slings and Arrows
    
51. [2001-01-13] Still Thinking
    
52. [2004-01-03] SunkenCiv
    
53. [2002-01-12] Tomalak
    
54. [2002-01-30] truenospinzone
    
55. [2003-01-12] Voice in your head
    
56. [2004-01-29] wagglebee
    
57. [2002-01-30] wallcrawlr
    
58. [2001-01-10] Weatherman123
    
59. [1998-01-22] wotan
    
60. [2004-01-15] writer33
    
61. [1998-01-21] zerosix
    

CrevoSci Threads for the Past Week

1. 2006-01-31 Darwinist Ideologues Are on the Run
2. 2006-01-30 Belief in intelligent design is pure logic
3. 2006-01-30 Buddhism and Neuroscience [The spirit helps/owns science! YES! for capitalists]
4. 2006-01-30 Celebrate Darwin Day Feb. 9-13 at Cornell, Ithaca College and the Museum of the Earth
5. 2006-01-30 Intelligent Design belittles God, Vatican director says
6. 2006-01-30 Intelligent design is not creationism (Stephen Meyer)
7. 2006-01-30 Scientists Find Gene That Controls Type of Earwax in People
8. 2006-01-30 Summing Up Some Politically Incorrect Positions
9. 2006-01-29 Design and the Anthropic Principle
10. 2006-01-29 Intelligent Design in the Philosophy of Biology Curriculm at University of Bern (Switzerland)
11. 2006-01-29 The Symbolic Species The Co-Evolution of Language and the Brain
12. 2006-01-27 Evolutionary Theory: Verified or Vilified?
13. 2006-01-27 Morality on the Brain
14. 2006-01-27 Mountain ranges rise dramatically faster than expected (Earth not as old as evolutionists say)
15. 2006-01-27 Screwtape's 'Age of Darwinian Scientism'
16. 2006-01-26 BBC: Most Brits Don't Believe in Evolution
17. 2006-01-26 Fossil Yields Surprise Kin of Crocodiles
18. 2006-01-26 Making Darwin Right
19. 2006-01-26 Pitt Professor's Theory of Evolution Gets Boost From Cell Research [Sudden Origins]
20. 2006-01-26 What Are Creationists Afraid Of?
21. 2006-01-26 Why do you not understand what I say?(Understanding non-Christians)
22. 2006-01-25 Evolution Sunday!
23. 2006-01-25 Is ID science or religion?
24. 2006-01-25 Moon Is Dragging Continents West, Scientist Says
25. 2006-01-25 Movement hopes to bridge the gap between evolution and creationism
26. 2006-01-25 Nothing New under the Sun: Another Failed Attempt to Explain God Away
27. 2006-01-25 Studies examine withholding of scientific data among researchers, trainees
28. 2006-01-25 Time Changes Modern Human's Face

On this Date in CrevoSci History

1. 01/31/2005 'Birdbrain' Gets Some Smart Backers (Humans and Birds now originate from common Evolutionary branch)
2. 01/31/2005 Smithsonian in uproar over intelligent-design article
3. 01/31/2005 STATEMENT FROM THE COUNCIL OF THE BIOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON (ON THE MEYER ID PAPER)
4. 01/31/2004 JIMMY MONKEYS WITH EVOLUTION FOE
5. 01/31/2003 Genome Evolution | First, a Bang Then, a Shuffle
6. 01/31/2003 Is Randomness Really Random?
7. 01/31/2003 Polonium Radiohalos and the Age of the Earth - Update
8. 01/31/2003 Symmetry in Evolution

Deleted, Locked, or Pulled Threads

1. 11/15/2005 'Perception' gene tracked humanity's evolution, scientists say [Locked]
2. 04/27/2004 Stop Teaching Our Kids this Evolution Claptrap! [Pulled]
3. 10/29/2003 The Mystery of the Missing Links (Intelligent Design vs. Evolution) [Pulled]
4. 10/27/2003 Physics Nobelist Takes Stand on Evolution [Pulled]
5. 10/23/2003 Gene Found for Obsessive Compulsive Disorder [Pulled]
6. 10/21/2003 Artificial Proteins Assembled from Scratch [Pulled]
7. 09/23/2003 Solar System Formation Questions [Pulled]
8. 09/17/2003 Agreement of the Willing - Free Republic Science Threads [Pulled]
9. 08/20/2003 Lice offer clues to origin of clothing [Locked]
10. 07/19/2003 Darwin in a Box [Pulled]
11. 07/18/2003 Unlikely Group May Revive Darwin Debate [Evolution v. Creationism] [Pulled]
12. 07/02/2003 Unlocking the Mystery of 'Unlocking the Mystery of Life' [Pulled]
13. 06/26/2003 Darwin Faces a New Rival [Pulled]
14. 06/06/2003 Amazing Creatures [Pulled]
15. 05/30/2003 NUCLEAR DECAY: EVIDENCE FOR A YOUNG WORLD [Pulled]
16. 09/14/2002 Geological Theory Explains Origin of Ocean, Continents [Pulled]
17. 09/13/2002 Oldest Known Penis Is 100 Million Years Old [Pulled]
18. 04/13/2002 To Creationists: Is There a Global Conspiracy to Promote Evolution? [Pulled]
19. 04/10/2002 (Creationists) CRSC Correction [Pulled]
20. 04/04/2002 Evolution: What is it? (long article) [Locked]
21. 03/22/2002 Evolution is designed for science classes [Pulled]
22. 03/05/2002 Life found 'on margin of existence' [Pulled]
23. 11/10/2001 Alabama to continue biology textbook warning sticker [Pulled]
24. 11/06/2001 Warming makes mosquito evolve, University of Oregon scientists find [Pulled]
25. 09/18/2001 CHEERED BY BIGOTS, SCIENTIFIC INDIA TAKES 'GIANT LEAP BACKWARDS' [Pulled]
26. 08/29/2001 How Not to Defend Evolution [Deleted]
27. 08/28/2001 The Ultimate Creation vs. Evolution Resource [6th Revision] [Deleted]
28. 08/27/2001 Top Ten Problems with the Big Bang [Deleted]
29. 08/26/2001 A Scientific Account of the Origin of Life on Earth [Thread I] [Deleted]
30. 08/24/2001 Satellites Search for Noah’s Ark [Deleted]
31. 07/19/2001 The Effect of Darwinism on Morality and Christianity [Deleted]
32. 07/19/2001 The Scientific Case Against Evolution: A Summary Part I [Deleted]
33. 07/19/2001 The Scientific Case Against Evolution: A Summary Part II [Deleted]
34. 07/19/2001 Evolution is Religion — Not Science [Deleted]
35. 07/07/2001 Evolution Fraud in Current Biology Textbooks [Deleted]
36. 03/31/2001 Enlisting Science to Find the Fingerprints of a Creator [No Such File]
37. 01/13/2001 A Christian Understanding of Intelligent Design [Deleted]
38. 11/15/2000 Evolutionism Receives Another Hard Blow [Deleted]
39. 10/10/2000 Another Lost Generation? [Deleted]
40. 10/02/2000 God and the Academy [Deleted]
41. 09/18/2000 The World of Design [Deleted]
42. 08/30/2000 Evil-Ution [Deleted]
43. 11/14/1999 Creationism's Success Past 5 Years: (Gallup: 1 in 10 hold secular evolutionist perspective) [No Such File]

The Wall
"In death, all men are equal"

1. 1LongTimeLurker
2. 2Trievers
3. Ada Coddington
4. Ahab Brigade
5. Ahriman
6. akdonn
7. ALS
8. angelo
9. Area Freeper
10. Aric2000
11. Askel5
12. Asphalt
13. biblewonk
14. bluepistolero
15. Boot Hill
16. broberts
17. churchillbuff
18. claptrap
19. Clinton's a liar
20. codebreaker
21. Con X-Poser
22. D. Skippy
23. dbbeebs
24. Destro
25. DittoJed2
26. dob
27. Ed Current
28. Exnihilo
29. f.Christian
30. Far Gone
31. farmfriend
32. followerofchrist
33. freeparella
34. general_re
35. geros
36. Good Tidings Of Great Joy
37. goodseedhomeschool
38. gopwinsin04
39. gore3000
40. H.R. Gross
41. Happy2BMe
42. Helms
43. Ignatius J Reilly
44. IllumiNOTi
45. JediGirl
46. JesseShurun
47. JethroHathaway
48. JFK_Lib
49. jlogajan
50. JoeSchem
51. john_baldacci_is_a_commie
52. Justice Avenger
53. Kerberos
54. Kevin Curry
55. kharaku
56. knowquest
57. Land of the Irish
58. LarryLied
59. Le-Roy
60. malakhi
61. Marathon
62. masked face doom
63. medved
64. Merdoug
65. metacognative
66. mikeharris65
67. missyme
68. Modernman
69. Morris Hattrick
70. mrustow
71. n4sir
72. neoconsareright
73. newsperson999
74. NoKinToMonkeys
75. nuda_veritas
76. Ogmios
77. OnlyinAmerica
78. peg the prophet
79. Pern
80. Phaedrus
81. Phoroneus
82. pickemuphere
83. RCW2001
84. ReasonedThought
85. ret_medic
86. RickyJ
87. RJCogburn
88. Sabertooth
89. ScotchBible
90. SeaLion
91. Selkie
92. Shubi
93. spiker
94. SplashDog
95. Stingy Dog
96. StupidQuestions
97. That Subliminal Kid
98. The Loan Arranger
99. the lone rider
100. Tomax
101. tpaine
102. Truth666
103. Turan
104. twittle
105. Unalienable
106. USA2000
107. WaveThatFlag
108. What about Bob?
109. winner45
110. xm177e2

---

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

There is no mention of God, because the TOE assumes His non-existance.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[RogueIsland]

Everything Ichy posts is propaganda and opinion, no evidence.

Ah, the plaintive bleat of the militantly and self-righteously ignorant.

[ShadowAce]

why make mention of a supernatural entity in a context that cannot, in any way, address the supernatural?

That is exactly my point. Science is not the only begetter of Truth, and all these threads deriding creationists just make me shake my head in disbelief of the hypocrisy going on.

What I see are evolutionists mocking Christians because the Christians' faith doesn't match up to your naturalistic world view.

You choose to limit yourself and your beliefs to what you can touch, see, smell, and measure. There is more to life than the physical world. When you limit yourself to believing that science is the only begetter of truth, then you are making initial assumptions that should not be made.

The reason I connected the TOE and no mention of God and no other scientific theory, is that the TOE directly contradicts the Christian creation story. Relativity, gravity, etc. are merely theories observing how the universe works. The TOE attempts to explain our origins, creation (yes, I know, but the TOE relies on the Big Bang, etc. theories), and tries to discredit the Creator.

[Right Wing Professor]

Some bacteria reproduce by budding or fragmentation.", I would say that they reproduce asexually.

Sexuality in bacteria is not tied to reproduction; bacteria transfer genes via plasmids. Do you have any problem with the idea that single-celled organisms can exchange genetic material by comparatively simple means?

[Right Wing Professor]

The reason I connected the TOE and no mention of God and no other scientific theory, is that the TOE directly contradicts the Christian creation story.

So, if you read that story literally, does physics, astronomy, geology, chemistry, and virtually every other scientific field.

[Right Wing Professor]

There is no mention of God, because the TOE assumes His non-existance.

You've said this once, and were challenged to corroborate it. Now you've merely restated it without corroboration.

[VOA]

bump

[BMCDA]

OK, then lay out the TOE, and point out the possibility that God may have created everything we see.

I'm sorry to disappoint you but that is not a scientific approach. That an omnipotent being (should it exist) could have created everything we see and that even five minutes ago, is trivially true and therefore useless from a scientific point of view. There is no empirical way to either demonstrate the truth of that claim nor to refute it since every observation is compatible with Goddidit.

There is no mention of God, because the TOE assumes His non-existance.

And there is no mention of God or any other deity in other scientific theories either but somehow I never see creationists/IDers complain about that. So the Theory of Evolution no more assumes the nonexistence of your god than any other theory.
Also, not assuming the existence of a god is not the same as assuming his nonexistence. So science in general doesn't say that God could not have done this or that. At most one can say that science only claims that he need not have done it.

[Dustbunny]

LOL.............. OK, if you say so. Of course you saying so and anyone else saying the same thing does not make it so. It is sort of like a 'theory'.

theory (n) Synonyms: philosophy, model, concept, system, scheme, idea, notion, principle, belief, rule, technique
Synonyms: hypothesis, conjecture, speculation, assumption, premise, presumption, supposition, guess.
Synonyms: hypothesize, conjecture, imagine, conceive, posit, put forward, speculate.

It would take many more solid facts before a theory is no longer a theory.

Yep I am a 'creationist' but not the 6,000 year theory, I believe GOD created it all and that to him a million years is probably equal to a minute to us.

[Dustbunny]

THe same goes for Darwin. Nothing he said has ever been truly contradicted

Until now.

[nmh]

"Charles Krauthammer and George Will" are not folks I'd label conservatives. They've got more in common with godless LIBERALtarians.

Isn't is amazing how the name of Christ is being erased. Prayer hasn't been allowed in school since the 60's. And look at society. It's a mess, morally and any way you wish to categorize it. The word "Intelligent Design" was even used to take the edge off of acknowledging God. God is the "Intelligent Designer". Even there they beat around the bush in giving Him the credit He deserves.

To believe in evolution is insane. The evidence is all around you and it defies chance and evolving. It's moronic to buy into evolution.

Flame away!

[nmh]

I am not impressed with George Will. He's an egotistical blow hard.

[Dr._Joseph_Warren]

Literally hundreds of geneticists, biologists, paleontologists, chemists, mathematicians and other scientists—whose religious views vary from agnostic to evangelical—say the theory is not a fact.

Hmmm...

I would have thought that ALL scientist would have said that.

Theory is THEORY!!! By definition, theory is NOT fact.

The theory may be based on fact, but it is still a theory.

I don't see anyone referring to the Laws of Evolution.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

I seem to be stuck to the tar baby again. This is a very strange thing -- we're actually on the same side of the debate -- i.e. I'm an adherent of the ToE. I've also been an educator and think it is a huge mistake to try to keep opposing views out of the classroom -- no matter how lacking they may be. Scientists cannot be trained by memorization of approved "truths" and indoctrination into certain world views -- they have to have to learn how to "do" science.

Also, if you're going to slag your opponents for being "unscientific" -- then you had better actually be using scientific language, and following the scientific method.

With respect -- the definition of theory that Coyoteman posted is bogus. It's worse than a "layman definition" -- it's wrong. Theories can be based either on deductive or inductive reasoning. Here's a definition from Answers.com (just the parts that pertain to this discussion)

1. A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

2. An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.

A lot of science is done through the inductive approach -- simply making a bunch of observations; then creating a tentative theory (conjecture) that seems to explain the observations. Makes sense doesn't it? You have to start somewhere. The value of such a theory lies in the number of testable hypothesis that it can generate. These hypothesis are tested -- and, the theory changed, if necessary.

Please note that this is exactly how the Theory of Evolution was created. Darwin collected samples and made observations -- then he proposed a tentative theory. The theory generated many testable hypothesis and has so far survived all the tests.

If the theory survives the testing, we can say that it "has not yet been disproven". This is no trifling matter -- it is the very essence of the scientific method. If you're going to try to convince people of the superiority of the ToE on the basis of "science"; then you had better actually be using the scientific method or you will not have any credibility. There are a lot of good sites about the philosophy of science on the Web -- here's a brief introductory one: http://www.philosopher.org.uk/sci.htm BTW, do not go to Wikipedia for this -- a lot of what they have on the subject is crap.

Please take this in the spirit in which I offered it -- we agree on the main point; I'm just trying to make your arguments better. l

[ShadowAce]

You've said this once, and were challenged to corroborate it.

Are you actually trying to tell me that the TOE assumes there is a God? It's one or the other. Since the whole point of the TOE is to try to explain our history and, by extension, our origins, I'd say it's trying to discredit the whole idea of God.

[furball4paws]

Then you are badly misinformed.

[ShadowAce]

There are creatures that can reproduce asexually or by sharing genetic material with another of the same species. Why do you think that it was a one-and-then-the-other event?

Let's get our tense straight. According to the TOE, we all started from one thing--some kind of goo, which became cells, bacteria, etc. By simple logic, at some point it was a one-and-then-the-other event.