Discovery's Creation [The rise & fall of the Discovery Institute]

Seattle Weekly ^ | 01 February 2006 | Roger Downey

[Aquinasfan]

Philip Johnson laid out his "Wedge Strategy" in "Darwin on Trial," which was published many years before the Discovery Institute developed their "top secret" plan.

As a student of history, Johnson knows that intellectual paradigm shifts begin in the academy, disperse through the schools, and ultimately become conventional wisdom 30 or 40 years later. So far, things are proceeding on pace.

[RunningWolf]

//I can not find a consistent set of facts that actually lead to a definitive conclusion//

This is the same kind of observation that led me to reject this toe theory, although I doubt I really ever took it on completely anyway .

Wolf

[jec41]

Here is a short list of things I find offensive about Darwinists:
And here is the rebuttal:

1)Claiming to know what God does or does not do. Claiming to know what God does or does not do is not of science but of the philosophy of theology and argument. Science is restricted to material things and is simply the observation of fact, evidence, empirical evidence and the possible logical deducted explanation of fact, evidence and empirical evidence which constitutes theory. It does not claim anything. Explanation or theories change when fact, evidence, empirical evidence, or there is a better logical deduction.

2) The assertion that they alone can judge what is science and what is not science. The scientific method and science is of philosophy. It is the study of material things that exist in fact, or that there is evidence or empirical evidence for existence. Science is the examination of things known. Philosophy is the examination of things not known. What is science and what is not science has been defined for thousands of years and has not changed. It was not defined by science but by the philosophical thought of science.

3) Science holier than thou. The assertion or impression that scientists are selfless, noble, kind, generous seekers of truth. Barf alert. There is nothing that would prevent thou from being selfless, noble, kind and a generous seeker of truth other than thou's own thoughts, philosophy and action.

4) Refusal to debate intelligent design proponents. This is offensive to American tradition. I suspect the refusal stems mainly from cowardice. I would debate by philosophy or by science!! We can start with philosophy and argue proofs for and against the existence of ID by observance and logical deduction. Or we can start with science if there is fact, evidence, or empirical evidence that ID exists as a material thing. We could argue the explanation of such evidence if it exists. Name calling however is but the result of one's own ignorance and more of a American tradition that would ignore the rules and premises for debate that have existed for thousands of years.

5)Intellectual bullying. Ichneumon's long posts are Exhibit A. It's very ugly and it's outside both American and Christian tradition to behave this way. It's a leftist type of tactic: shouting down the opponent. Intellectual bullying is suffered by those who lack the skills, knowledge, and logical deduction for argument or debate and in fact is not bullying at all but simply that one suffers from the inability to refute argument or debate. Name calling or accusation is the result of the inability to refute argument and debate.

6)Stepping out of their proper role. The role of biologists should be a humble one: to work on developing useful medicines, hardy plant and animal varieties, and a general understanding of life. They have no role in politics, religion or education. The role of a biologist is defined and his work has to adhere to the scientific method. His Politics, religion or education like yours is but philosophy and is comprised of faith, belief, thought, opinion, and indoctrination and would be one's own philosophy. Is your argument that one should be deprive of their own philosophy and forced to accept yours? Your statement "We have local school control for a reason." says it all. You seek control of all thoughts, philosophy, science, and propaganda which are not of your own opinion and would yourself be the Emperor. You reveal yourself with your own thought.

6) Assertions of the truth of evolutionary theory on the basis that it has been "widely accepted" or "believed by all scientists." The Communist Manifesto was also believed by all members of the Supreme Soviet. That did not make it true. Darwinists should not claim something is scientifically true until they can actually prove it. That they do otherwise is very offensive to me. Your assertions of truth would leave one amazed. Science does not proclaim any truths. In fact truth is not a word used in science. Again scientific theory is the best explanation for fact, evidence, and empirical evidence for a material thing. It is never asserted as proof and that it is asserted is only of your opinion. Argument and thought are offensive to you because you lack the ability to refute argument and thought. You would accuse others of offense when it is but the result of your own performance that is the culprit and is the offense.

[Junior]

You've become a bit of a one-note wonder, haven't you?

[Elsie]

Then there's been a whole LOTTA separatin' been goin' on over the millineums!

YES! You finally get it!

---

---

 

NIV Luke 16:19-31
 19.  "There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day.
 20.  At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores
 21.  and longing to eat what fell from the rich man's table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.
 22.  "The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried.
 23.  In hell,  where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side.
 24.  So he called to him, `Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.'
 25.  "But Abraham replied, `Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony.
 26.  And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.'      (Evolutionary potential)
 27.  "He answered, `Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father's house,
 28.  for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.'
 29.  "Abraham replied, `They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.'
 30.  "`No, father Abraham,' he said, `but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.'
 31.  "He said to him, `If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.'"

[blowfish]

5)Intellectual bullying. Ichneumon's long posts are Exhibit A.

Nonsense. There are many posts on these threads denying the evidence for evolution. He demonstrates the falsity of these claims. Then people whine that he presents too much material. Boo fricken hoo.

2) The assertion that they alone can judge what is science and what is not science. The scientific method and science is of philosophy.

Sorry, but the molecular biologists, anatomists and palentologists display a *much* better knowledge of "the scientific method" that the creationist/ID types on these threads, who are happy to ignore this method and rewrite the laws of physics, thermodynamics etc when their particular understanding of the bible.

4) Refusal to debate intelligent design proponents.

a) Should they debate astrologers also? They have just as much scientific evidence.
b) Unlike many of the ID proponents, most working scientists have useful work that needs to get done.

6)Stepping out of their proper role. The role of biologists should be a humble one: to work on developing useful medicines, hardy plant and animal varieties, and a general understanding of life.

Sez who? And if the study of evolution and the origin of species isn't "and a general understanding of life.", what is?

[Elsie]

I sure hope so!

1 Corinthians 2

1. When I came to you, brothers, I did not come with eloquence or superior wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God.
2. For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.

[Tribune7]

Good post

[Junior]

For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.

Willful ignorance is Biblical...

[connectthedots]

Seattle Weekly is a liberal alternative newspaper. What would you expect? It's also the home of Jim McDermott, who wins re-elections by landslides.

[highball]

Still haven't seen that alternative interpretation of the fossil record that addresses the evidence....

[fortheDeclaration]

Excellent post!

O Timothy,keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and opposition of science falsely so called (1Tim.6:20)

[Right Wing Professor]

What biological or genetic function fails to work if some forms of life arose independent of some others?

The genetic codes of organisms make no sense unless there is common descent. There would simply be a huge number of unexplained regularities and differences. Without common descent, we couldn't predict the gene or protein sequence for a gene in an unsequenced organism. Common descent is the organizing and unifying principle that underlies the field of genomics.

BTW, a good friend of mine is completing his doctorate in molecular biology, and he told me he does not embrace common descent. I think he may understand biology and genetics since a major medical institution is employing him to research cancer.

Yeah, yeah, we've heard the standard tales of brothers in law who are supergeniuses in a biological field and don't believe in evolution. If you seriously want this to be believed, have him post, and say for himself why he believes this.

[Right Wing Professor]

As a student of history, Johnson knows that intellectual paradigm shifts begin in the academy, disperse through the schools, and ultimately become conventional wisdom 30 or 40 years later.

Too bad you're hopelessly stuck on step 1.

[Right Wing Professor]

Universal common descent is nonessential to any science. What consequences would there be of it being untrue?

The 16S ribosomal phylogenetic tree would make no sense. Why, if we are descended from two separately created organisms, do all our ribosomes fall on a single phylogenetic tree?

[highball]

"As a student of history, Johnson knows that intellectual paradigm shifts begin in the academy, disperse through the schools, and ultimately become conventional wisdom 30 or 40 years later."

Too bad you're hopelessly stuck on step 1.

Not even that. We have outside pressure groups trying to introduce an agenda. It hasn't gotten anywhere near the academy.

[Right Wing Professor]

Well, UCD is a joke.

Better check the latest memo from DI. UCD is now in. Get with the program.

[jec41]

Sez who? And if the study of evolution and the origin of species isn't "and a general understanding of life.", what is?

Read post # 8 My post was a rebuttel to his only I should have used HTML and the points may have been clearer

[connectthedots]

Jones decision in the dover case is not binding for any parties other than the ones directly involved in that case. Jones' opinion has absolutely no relevance to any future case; even within the same district.

[longshadow]

"Church of the Butt-Propeller" (DI) placemarker.