Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

Are you suggesting scientists have nothing to hide fm?

I'm sure, but the criticism quoted concerned the new Louisiana textbooks - Rosborne and I are looking for backup details, if any.

The person quoted in the news article is Lennie Ditoro who represents the Louisiana Family Forum. I did not find where she gave any specifics for her argument. The position of the organization she works for is that the science textbooks give "too much credibility to Darwin." The spokesperson would consider a science textbook to be outdated if it does not mention the criticisms advanced by proponents of intelligent design.

It's not just ID's "challenge". Look at previous page - there's now something called "biocentrism", peddled by some medic and Deepak Chopra.

What is "biocentrism?"

I'm trying to find out more details - only just came across the term myself. Post is on previous page
http://able2know.org/topic/121621-384#post-4413195

That was actually my point. I didn't expect anyone to be able to list any valid scientific challenges because there are none.

People like Lennie Ditoro are just making up **** as they go and stating it as though it was true when in fact it's complete BS.

If forced to substantiate her claims I bet all we would see is a recitation of the standard litany of creationist propaganda, all of which has already been thoroughly debunked (over and over and over and over again).

See link posted for Cicerone - there's yet another manifestation of pseudoscientific jargon, this time with one faith healer and one MD deciding they have grasped quantum mechanics and the anthropic principle. The MD and the healer are making headway in the minds of the naive, the superstitious, the uneducated - and the uneducable. Posted link on Dyslexia's thread, here it is again:
http://www.anthropic-principle.com/book/anthropicbias.html#R002
How bad can things get? I don't know. I do know I'm out of here until further notice. Will be reading you all with interest.

I actually like the current opinion about life. We are not the only planet with life; there are many universes out there with life forms, but we just haven't had the opportunity (or science) to explore that far - yet.

I believe all scientists agree that water is necessary for life. They have found water on mars and the moon. Whether they had life forms are unknown, but we can extrapolate that idea into other universes that may replicate what is found on earth; the perfect environment. Even on earth, there are life forms that only recently came to light. There are life forms that live close to where hot water leaks from the ocean floor at temperatures other life forms would not survive.

At the California Academy of Science in San Francisco, they now show a movie called LIFE at their planetarium theater. Most scientists agree now that what we see of life on earth took billions of years which evolved from carbon and hydrogen. If you ever visit in this area, please let me know, and I'll take you as a guest to see the show. I took my son when he visited us this past week.

Thank you so much for the kind invitation - perhaps on my way back from the other end of the Pacific, around Christmas? Please separately note when you say "universes" (not proven) you of course mean "solar systems" (not in any doubt). Always good to see you

Around Christmas should be fine; I'll be back from South India on December 15.

I'm not anywhere nears understanding string theory, but it seems to imply multi-universe. I think humans have a limitation as to our concept about life, and are barely touching the surface about how so-called worlds (universes) are "out there." Infinity is difficult to conceptualize. What's beyond all those galaxies?

Maybe, we're talking about the same thing.

Of course there are none if ros puts them on Ignore. He's using "scientific" self-referentially which is utterly ridiculous from the scientific point of view.

He could just as easily asserted that there were no scientific challenges to Newton before Einstein came along.

I don't know what ros is doing on a scientific thread. It must be some thrapping of his vanity thing he has. His statement, coupled with him having closed his eyes, proves, beyond a shadow of doubt, that he hasn't a scientific bone in his body and thus his interruptions on a science thread are trolling.

People like ros are just making up **** as they go and stating it as though it was true when in fact it's complete BS.



If it has been thoroughly debunked (over and over and over and over again) why are there so many people, including elected people of the highest ranks who are not yet convinced. Will somebody explain that to me avoiding, if they can, saying that they are all cretins, morons and dipshits. Some explanation that a scientist might offer.

spendi, It's a given that putting anyone on Ignore doesn't improve the IDer's opinion one way or another. They are "never" able to explain what they say, because they can't. Only fools continue to listen to irrational blather.

perhaps I am overly parsing the word but the universe is commonly defined as the totality of everything that exists. under that definition there can not be multiple universes, there can only be knowns and unknowns within the universe.

ok, I'll take your word for it.

No, he mean "universes" when he says "universes" and, according to M Theory, he'd be right. String theory,which postulates about such things as eleven time/space dimensions plus the speed of light in this universe and perhaps more in other universes, sees a stack of realities [branes, M-branes, F-branes and (no kidding) p-branes] intermingling multidemensionally creating whole new universes as their various elements combine, repel and destroy each other.

Cool huh? One hundred and fifty years ago, we thought that the Milky Way was all that there was in universe. Imagine. We thought that our one little galaxy was everything. We now know that there are billions of galaxies bigger and smaller than ours. One hundred and fifty years from now, humans (if any are left) will be chortling about how in 2010 there were those who believed that there was only one universe.
Joe(.."and, get this, evolution was doubted.. hah ha ha")Nation

yeah, dys, commonly defined as everything, but not scientifically. The Theory of Multiverses has been around for about fifty years. There are those who talk about the cosmic archipelago, a string of universes like ours.
Joe(yeah. some good dope)Nation

You missed the point ci. As usual. Obviously there are no scientific arguments for ID if only the sitting duck arguments are considered. The whole point of a sitting duck is that it's easy to shoot.

I have put the psychosomatic argument and the economic argument and the political argument and if they are all on Ignore obviously only the arguments that ros can shoot down count. And my big argument has only been hinted at.
So he's in a circularity. As you all are and have been all along and those are pure irrational blather everytime.

How can anything be explained to someone who runs to Momma's apron everytime an explanation is offered. You tell me.

spendi, You have described yourself to being a blatherer; you just can't see it for yourself.

Look ci. Deal with the post about ros's remarks. Please. Just for once. Tell me what is wrong with my response. I bet fm sits on his hands. I'm sure glad I haven't got you and ros on my side.