Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

I would never limit it to any one point of view. You are suggesting we should continue on that route.

Just to bring a bit of reality here, the Discovery Institute did not represent Dover school board. They only offered advice. That advice included not to go forward with their proposed changes which brought about the case.

The DI sent in its own team of Dembski nd Behe. If thats not representation then I need to be explained to. Also the Moore center was guaranteed by Discovery Institute for fee not met.
DI did drop out when it was going badly. Dembski dropped out 2 days into the trial because the school board was speaking openly religious and the case -in-chief was based on a"line from their own wedge document which claimed that ID was NOT a religious , but an alternate "theory". Steve Meyers , who also WAS one of the DI guys who pulled out of testifying because of the cluster **** attitude that prevailed between the DI, Moore, and the SChoolboard, pulled off a "Post Trial" Technical event"(called Intelligent Design Under Fire) at Biola College which was planned by DI to contribute to fostering the polarization and hostility toward science in order to belittle Judge Jones who, right after his decision, spoke ex juris about the DI and its "demonization of the judiciary and science in general".

The interesting thing is that Dembski himself spoke earlier on 'No theory pf evolution is sound unless it includes Jesus" (something like that). Then he and Meyers go ballistic because their Dover schoolboard partners use the "G_ _" word.

It was hardly "advice", DI was a partner before, during, and after the case.

Peoples beliefs outside of the trial and when determining school policy should be a ifrelevant. A muslim should be able to teach evolution and a Christian should be able to teach at Intelligent and Design

I can't believe you're actually having this conversation. Fortunately our schools don't have such nonsense. Science classes should deal with science, and only science. They should not have to teach something that has no scientific basis at all just to placate a bunch of religious weirdos.

If you want to teach ID teach it in RE. There's a place for it.

Science teachers don't complain that RE teachers aren't teaching photosynthesis.

But it would be a total sham if they talked one way and then tried to take a court position which is 180 different than their beliefs . Usually a court case is only to seek relief from whatever one has done or said in "real life"

Izzy's point actually sums up the entire quandry. We DO allow the teaching of ID in classes other than science.

Yes, you do.

DI agreed to be witnesses according to previously agreed guidlin…

Why the **** do I even care

SO you think DI a just walkin down the street and somebody yelled "Hey Discovery guys, wanna help us?"


AND the sending up several witnesses and underwriting costs, and providing textbooks, and coaching participants is nothing of a major commitment because its all strictly about the" science" of ID, IS that what you mean? Pulling out of the festivities as, as it turned out, a stupid career move for Discovery. They lost lots of credibility among their tru believers and they knew it was a cause lloaded with dumb turns and characters. However , DI saw this as a "This is OUR TIME"
issue.

BJ nd you have fallen into the "post DOVER" position of the DI where , ince 2007, theyve been excoriating Judge Jones (Previously considered a rising star in the conservative judiciary). Pres GW Bush spoke o highly of him at his nomination.

Was debating the past few days whether to respond to this because it is not related so much to the challenges evolutionism has.

But, you say the ‘Christian god’, the God of Israel uses ‘hell’ to scare ppl.
Not the case at all.
Sure, jail/isolation/hell is sadly required for those who will reject his way of life.
Just as ppl who remain lawless and rebellious in our society. Likewise.

God himself was quoted saying ‘he came to give abundant life’ heavenly society of law and order.
Maybe continue this thought on another thread?

Then again, I guess it kinda comes back to a challenge for evolutionism....morality.....how should we treat ppl, (like modified fish)and why or why not? Are there any real ‘consequences or benefits?’

Wow . . . blatant cognitive dissonance in addition to the typical christian hatefulness.

In our country, it depends on the crime, but execution is banned by around 40% of the states. I would venture to say that more states will ban executions in the future. https://www.quora.com/Are-public-executions-legal-in-the-USA
Executions are 19th century penalty without any positives. They do not reduce crime, nor killing a criminal who killed is contradictory on its face. A executioner who gets paid to execute a stranger with no criminal connection just doesn't prove to be good law or a good legal outcome. Once you execute an innocent prisoner, there's no correcting that mistake. http://www.newsweek.com/one-25-executed-us-innocent-study-claims-248889

actually you were debating with yourself about the fish and chips hypothesis. I believe that You really think that you are being profound.


Dictionary definitions re: morals are several. Not one mentions any kind of religion (unless you include the no 11 one "lessons of proper behavior derived from stories, fables, experience etc")

So youve got something extra special to propose ??

According to you though morals cannot be derived from experience because all we experience is nature(including our minds and our bodies). And nature has no designed purpose. So morals are defined by how we understand the process. Which can logically be reasoned as we are smart fish with no more intrinsic value than them. Which leads to either devaluing all life or vegetarianism.

If we are special and created in Gods image And nature has and reveals a purpose, then human life and the consequences of our choices now begin to factor in logically and with the highest priority into morallity.

we hazvde brains. '''we can think, we can abd have created moral systems we live by toktally independent of religion. Hell, even multiople species of animalks display compassion, and rhey probably don't have gods. why should we be less than them?

Animals are preprogrammed to react a certain way. (Instinct). We know it is instinct because as a group there behavior never changes (morally anyway). One generation doesn’t suddenly biuld new homeless shelters.

They no doubt did, and they knew the risk and they advised the Dover school board NOT to attempt teaching ID in school and NOT to make the changes to their guidelines.

Those are the facts regardless of the crap you make up about DI.

DI does think ‘ this is our time' not because of stupid court cases like K vs Dover but because science is just coming around to acknowledging the gaping holes in existing theories, as I have shown in the published peer reviewed papers written by leading scientists which you so breezily dismiss. What hubris.

BTW, I think it's hilarious that you and your 'enemy #1' Stephen Meyers of the Discovery Institute started your education with the same degree and job (hunting Dino juice . You became frozen in your quest for knowledge but it only piqued his interest. He went back to school and research and you remain mired in the past.

You do not inow much about animal behavior, do you?

after the case was underway, I agree. Why did the DI give the "Panda's and People " a complete rinse and change "Creationism" to Intelligent Design" in all the text??
Why did DI sponsors underwrite the costs??
I think your (of late) interest in Dover hs been adjusted by the post trial bullshit tours these clowns have been mounting since 2007. Face it, they are a bunch of liars about what Dover represented to them and no matter how much theyve tried to distance themselves, I dont think they will ever live that down .

BTW, I sat in a lot of the testimony along with a few other cience faculty members.

Weve also followed up the BS that has been printed by DI in the last 10 years. Its as good as it gets re: "If you cant lose honorably, just lie your asses off"
Be careful bout what you read. Id suggest some of the free press like the Harrisburg Patriot or the Philly Inquirer. (They had no dogs in the fight and it was motly done as a feature or investigative reports about our "Strange beliefs'.
It not so much that DI was involved (mostly clandestinly except for the leadership and testimony that would b in alignment with DI'd "Wedge Strategy"). Actually, the DI needed some big event to consolidate it's wedge strategy. Howard Ahmanson, a savings bank heir and a devout creationist, dropped in the funds for the "Slick start-up" of DI's mission and communication network. It was here where the Behe's, Berlinski's Dembski's Myers etc and Austens got their connection. the whole thing started at a conference in 1993 at Pajaro Dunes the estate of the Ahmanson's, where Phil Johnson and his "darwin on Trial" was made into a structure of what became the DI shortly after that.
DI's footprints were all over Dover. Mr Buckingham , now being vilified as a" drunken , authoritarian, mission directed Creationist who was a little nuts" was, originally given the credits for getting the concept of aGODLESS ID on the case docket.
Then, because he bspoke the same shot that Dembski said a decade earlier ("Christ must be at the center of any theory of science...).That was where the DI began its pull out of the case (BUT, it was already several months into the depositions and discovery and all the way to 2 days into the testimony. I can see how the DI website would claim that they were "against the case ". They were , when Buckinghm stated to the papers that "were gonna dea; with this godless evolution"

Yep, Id run too if Ise tryin to hide the facts behind my club

Ps this boat i a hotspot. We may not leave till late because, (believe it or not) The mid bay winds are high and weve got some rooky sailors on board

I think , even though S Myer had a BS in physics and geophysics , his follwo -on advanced ed was in PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE. I wonder if youve confused the work with PZ Myer who is a "real scientist"

Im not gonna bother , I think you can go visit.

My biggest note about DI is that they stuff the net with all kinds of glitzy **** that folks like you lap up in complete ignorance of what youre speaking.

I love it, Ive remained "mired" . Steve Meyer is only a fellow at the Discovery Institute. Thats sorta like getting a public service award from the Mafia. It a meaningless BS conferred status from a meaningless pseudoscience organization sponsored by past "Creationists" who are trying to clean up their image and hoping enough morons buy it.

Hows it working out for you? Why not join NCSE , they have no clndestin religious affiliations and fake scientific research pubs.

"Peer review" about evolution in thir "journal" Is like a study of evolutionary anthropology featuring Alley Oop.

Right, Meyer isn’t a real scientist, like Cambridge isn’t A real college and Nature is a publication for quacks. Come on, you can do better.

It’s working out just fine for me out here in the high desert. Come on out and we can work this out while passing the pipe. It’s hard to keep one lit out there on the ocean.