20
   

Evolutionry/religious nonsense

 
 
edgarblythe
 
  3  
Reply Sat 12 May, 2018 09:28 pm
All this with the cars is totally irrelevant to religion or science, in the context being used. Just argument for the sake of making noise.
0 Replies
 
brianjakub
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 May, 2018 09:30 pm
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
And no matter how long two cars sit in Brian.s garage, they will NEVER EVER produce a baby car that has a blend of their design in it and maybe some new and innovative design
That is because we don't have the intelligence and probably not the physical capability to make a living automobile.

And if I put a pool of all the hydrocarbons or, amino acids, or RNA or DNA that are necessary to produce life in the same garage it will remain a pool of hydrocarbons and slowly deteriorate unless somebody smarter than us with greater capabilities turns them into life.
0 Replies
 
brianjakub
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 May, 2018 09:39 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
How big must the group be in order to accommodate your desire to "debate it". Ive given you the example of the teachers of Dover an the citizen majority v the school board and a singular Evangelical Church group. According to you,That didnt qualify?? Why not??
All philosophical points of view should be represented.
Quote:

The reasons the teachers did NOT join the suit was that they were in danger of losing their jobs for something that constituted "mutiny" . Talk about one sided justice.
Teachers don't decide curriculum. (And neither should judges) Legislators and school boards do in open debate until Dover when one judge decided all future debates for everyone always.

If the teachers want to debate join in the legislative process.

If a group of teachers with leanings toward ID teach in a school district should they start teaching what they want?
0 Replies
 
brianjakub
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 May, 2018 09:43 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
I dont. You just dont understnd the issue well enough. Your opinions are typical DI borne (Weve hd several others here who claimed the judge DIDNT understand the US Constitution. If that was the case, why didnt the IDers carry it higher to the State Supreme Court??
Hint: the election came and the majority of the school board was dumped by the voters).

That IS the genius of our system.
Because it costs too much money and requires a public school school board to volunteer to be next test case. But, don't worry it will come. I just hope we have a logical judge that believes in the rights our constitution was written to guarantee even for minority points of view.
Quote:
Settlement of the legal fees

On February 21, 2006, the newly elected Dover Area School Board voted, unanimously with one abstention, to pay $1,000,011 in legal fees and damages due to the parents and their lawyers as a result of the verdict in the case, a large sum of money for a small district. The previous school board had been offered the opportunity to rescind its policy, and avoid paying legal fees, immediately after the lawsuit was filed in 2004, but it declined. The parents' attorneys Pepper Hamilton stated that court records would show that they were entitled to more than $2 million, but were going to accept less than half that amount in recognition of the small size of the school district, and because the school board that voted for the policy had been voted out of office, leaving the new school board "having the bill placed in their laps." The previous school board had been defended without charge by the Thomas More Law Center.[41] Richard Katskee, assistant legal director for Americans United, said of the trial's cost, "Any board thinking of trying to do what the Dover board did is going to have to look for a bill in excess of $2 million," and "I think $2 million is a lot to explain to taxpayers for a lawsuit that should never be fought."[42]
0 Replies
 
brianjakub
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 May, 2018 10:08 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
Secondly this was a philosophical freedom discussion that was turned into a scientific and religious freedom discussion that ended up by outlawing one philosophical point of view because the proponents of the view had a specific belief in who the thought the creator was

It was NEVER a philosophical argument. It was an argument that tried to seek relief from a strong armed religious tactic to bring the teaching of ID into SCIENCE CLASS. The entire issue WAS brought up by the history and PAD faculties to be taught as a"Problems Of American Democracy"(social Studies), and the three school board members who were heavy handing the entire ID issue would NOT back down. They were being fed free literature and textbooks by the Discovery Institute (Who were the fraudniks in the entire case). Basically the school board left the citizens with NO alternative but to seek relief in court.
This is an issue for voters to decide. The courts shouldn't be used to overturn a legislative body. Besides the children were being taught both philosophical views. Now they are being forced to learn only one by an unelected illogical judge.

Quote:
The judge did an excellent job. He is a Devout Christian and a conservative who just could NOT back off on the issue of the establishment clause of amendment 1 of the Bill of Rights of our nations Constitution.


His religious or philosophical beliefs should be irrelevant. The beliefs and philosophical beliefs of the writer's of the constitution should be considered when interpreting the establishment clause.

Quote:
Now that you seem to want to deny the court' s and want to "debate it" . whether you understand or not, the debate part has left the station because after the Butler laws and Aguillard, I think weve pretty well established the rules for science classes. I assume thats why youve got your kids in Catholic SChools (but dont they teach evolution by natural selection as theory an Fact??)
They teach it as a theory like everyone else but they also talk about the statitistical improbabilities that it happened by random introduction of information. The admit the math is correct and then provide the identity of the designer. But about 3 percent of our kids graduate as atheists (which is probably about 1/2 the US average). We don't just teach doctrine. We teach that the facts support Catholic Doctrine. The church in our diocese used to teach like the Jesuits which was,"Teach doctrine and science separate and don't try to understand and teach how they logically support each other". Do to the fact that the Jesuits ran our universities that doctrine is poorly developed from years of poor logical understanding of Catholic philosophy and science.

Quote:
The number approaching assurance gets bigger and bigger until the chances of "variability occuring" are nominal and the variability itself is quite variable, .
No it doesn't. You can't win the lottery without intelligence designing the lottery.

All the tickets have to have a predetermined intelligently designed system for there to be a winner. For instance if there are 7 lottery numbers then every lottery ticket must have seven numbers not anything from 0 to infinity.

Quote:
thus allowing nat selection to select FOR an individual with the good luck to hve the good genes


Natural selection has nothing to do with how the new information is introduced into the system only random processes or complex systems developed by random introduction of new information. Natural selection shouldn't even be part of the debhate since we know that works and we observe it happening today every time an animal goes extinct. (which shouldn't bother us because evolution will produce a new organism someday anyway. We still have millions evolving to higher life forms if evolution is correct)
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sat 12 May, 2018 10:15 pm
The first clause of the first amendment to the constitution reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion . . . The Supreme Court has incorporated that amendment, which means that they have extended that provision beyond the Congress to embrace all governmental bodies, based on the first paragraph of the fourteenth amendment. That paragraph reads: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.. It may come as a shock to you, but not all citizens are christians. Their rights are abridged when any governmental body enforces any statute which panders to the religious beliefs of the Abrahamic religions. Sikhs, Jains, Hindus, Daoists, Rastafarians, Buddhists and several other religious confessions, as well as agnostics and atheists have their equal protection under the laws violated when any governmental body establishes the Abrahamic religions through it's policies or its laws. The judge in the Dover case was therefore acting correctly in his decision, and handed down a constitutionally correct decision. So, indeed, our constitution protects people of minority group--in this case, those who are not members of the confessions of any Abrahamic religion or who are agnostic or atheist.

What a shame that you cannot warp the clear intent of the constitution and precedential rullings to impose your religious beliefs of others.

*sigh*
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 May, 2018 10:35 pm
@Setanta,
You are correct on the law, but the history of this country does not support the full protections of those laws. As you probably know, during WWII, we Japanese Americans were put into 10 concentration camps. The Constitution failed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_Japanese_Americans
Quote:

Internment of Japanese Americans
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Institutions of the War Relocation Authority in the Western United States
Date February 19, 1942 – March 20, 1946[1][2][3]
The internment of Japanese Americans in the United States during World War II was the forced relocation and incarceration in camps in the western interior of the country of between 110,000 and 120,000[5] people of Japanese ancestry, most of whom lived on the Pacific coast. Sixty-two percent of the internees were United States citizens.[6][7] These actions were ordered by President Franklin D. Roosevelt shortly after Imperial Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor.[8]
brianjakub
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 May, 2018 11:04 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Thanks for pointing out the bigoted decisions courts can make. Now the courts have transferred that bigotry from racism to people who understand the statistical probabilities of evolution being initiated and progressing without intelligence is unlikely.

Do you think I could get some kind a reimbursement like the Japanese did for all the tax dollars that I am sending to the bigoted public school system that will only discuss one point to view the one I just established by the federa government by an unelected judge irather than my school board or legislature.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 May, 2018 12:33 am
@cicerone imposter,
No system is perfect, of course. It is ironic that the California attorney general who pushed the internment of Japanese and signed internment orders as Governor was Earl Warren. The irony is that Warren was the Chief Justice at the time of the landmark 1954 segregation case of Brown versus Board of Education. As a child, I saw the billboards that conservatives paid for which read: "Impeach Earl Warren"--a further irony.

Irony is inescapable in human history. In 1882, Congress passed and President Arthur signed the Chinese Exclusion Act. It didn't exclude all Chinese, just Chinese laborers. It was never challenged, because, of course, Chinese laborers didn't understand these things, and couldn't afford lawyers. Irony rears its head in that labor recruiters immediately began recruiting Japanese to come to California to replace the Chinese labor that was no longer available. The now liberal west coast was a hotbed of racial prejudice against east Asians in that era, and the entire "Yellow Peril" racial paranoia started there. Yet more irony comes from the decision in Yick Wo versus Hopkins (1886) in which a more prosperous Chinese gentleman who could afford a lawyer challenged a ruling by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors prohibiting anyone from owning a laundry in a wooden building--at that time a direct attack on the Chinese, as almost no other ethnic or national group ran laundries. The Supremes had never had the opportunity to review the Chinese Exclusion Act, but they came down on the Board of Supervisors like a ton of bricks. The lawyers of the representative of the Board, Mr. Hopkins, were effectively the lawyers for the Board, argued that laundries in wooden buildings were a fire hazard. While this was true, Yick's laundry had passed every fire inspection, and as his lawyer pointed out, no similar ordinance applied to cook shops and restaurants in wooden building, a more common fire hazard. The Court found for the plaintiff in a unanimous decision, pointing out that the ordinance was discriminatory in its application, and that the question of whether or not the Board had a legal right to pass such an ordinance was irrelevant. More irony comes from the citation of Yick Wo by the Warren court in the 1954 ruling. Finally, the decision in Yick Wo was based on the first paragraph of the fourteenth amendment (quoted above), and the decision explicitly said that one may not discriminate on the basis of nationality. The most recent irony has been the citation of Yick Wo in appeals against President Plump's attempt to impose a travel ban on Muslims.

The Japanese quickly became the new bogey men of the West Coast racists, and the reliable San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed an ordinance mandating separate schools for the children of Japanese immigrants. Theodore Roosevelt, who was President by then, had gotten pretty sick of the California racists, especially as he had gotten the respect of the Japanese Imperial government (if not the people of Japan) for getting the Japanese and the Russians together to negotiate an end to the Russo-Japanese War. By 1924, it had gotten bad enough that all new Chinese and Japanese immigration was prohibited by the National Origins Quota. The Japanese who were interned were almost all of them American citizens, although the oldest generation may have been born in Japan.

*********************************************

We have the same thing going on with the god squad. They are fighting in the last ditch to maintain their entrenched religious bigotry. The ruling in Lemon versus Kurtzman established a test for whether or not an act or a ruling violates the establishment clause--that's what the Lemon Test is all about. The god squad will continue to whine about that and the Kitzmiller ruling because they have not one scrap of evidence for their imaginary friend, and therefore not one scrap of evidence for any design or any guiding intelligence. Their position is bankrupt, which leaves attempts to divert the discussion as their only rhetorical tool.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 May, 2018 12:36 am
@brianjakub,
brianjakub wrote:
. . . people who understand the statistical probabilities of evolution being initiated and progressing without intelligence is unlikely.


Uh-huh . . . perhaps you could share with us your evidence that that is true. So far, neither you nor any other theist in this thread has provided a single scrap of evidence.
0 Replies
 
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 May, 2018 04:42 am
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
And no matter how long two cars sit in Brian.s garage, they will NEVER EVER produce a baby car that has a blend of their design in it and maybe some new and innovative design.

Pretty funny, but you've never seen my garage because that happens all the time in mine. Farmer's too, if he follows through on the plans he's talked about. And it happens only by the introduction of intelligent design.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 May, 2018 05:58 am
@brianjakub,
First off, I never countenanced the DOVER suit , since it really was relief from a stupid action of a one sided schoolboard who only wanted their POV preached in science class. The faculty, told by the school board that their jobs could be in jeopardy should they take sides, was indignant. The school board WAS VOTED OUT OF OFFICE.(You keep asserting the the ultimate outcome be left to the voters, well, that happened because the "Stealth Creationists" on the SChoolboard were elected under a false platform of "fiscal responsibility". ) They lied about their ultimate agendas because they tried to strong arm their belief upon the entire school district. (AND you still support that way of doing the public business??)

farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 May, 2018 06:56 am
@brianjakub,
Quote:
This is an issue for voters to decide. The courts shouldn't be used to overturn a legislative body
check, thats ultimately hat happened. The plaintiffs had to wait four years and the parents who bgan the suit saw their kids being CHEATED in their brief senior High education . Several of the kids were trying to plan careers in biological sciences or pre med. The initial announcement of a mere tag to be affixed with a relatively harmless "definition of what the IDers feel is a theory in science" , was going to be followed up by presenting "OF Pandas and People" which was a handbook of Creationism that was later edited to remove the word "Creationism" and substituted by "Intelligent Design" I notice how you flopp your story around. ACtually everything you mentioned was done in Dover BEFORE the suit was brought


1.DISCUSSION AND DEBATE--Lots of time was wasted in the schoolboard meetings where parents, when they learned about the three "Stealth Creationism bord members"

2. VOTERS-t firt the voters had no recourse because the new schoolboard had four years to do its dirty deed. They failed much of thir routine responsibility and took up the ID issue .

3 The science faculty became more active and appeared at board meetings to try to resist what would become the voting in of initiating some ID in biology.(Science faculty was warned how they work at the pleasure of the board, now firmly in the hands of the ID majority.
4. The law suit resulted from numerous appeals to the board over several years(which were totally ignored--So much for your "open
discussion")
5.The LAWSUIT, was filed and the school board was immediately in the hands of the Dicovery Institute (who later abandoned their association because they saw the writing on the wall when their entire case was based upon the statement that ID "WAS SCIENCE", and this was going vry badly during the trial)
Discovery Institute actually abandoned their involvement and pulled several of their experts, leving The More Institute hanging there with little remaining weaponry.

The plaintiffs witnesses made certain that (While the case did involve the evidence for Darwin and the lack of any evidence by ID )
"SCience really doesnt consider the issues of meaning in the universe. Scientists think all the time about the meaning of their work, about the purpose of life, about the purpose of their own lives. I certainlly do. But these questions... are not scientific questions. If I could solve the question about the purpose and meaning of my life by doing an experiment in the laboratory,I assure you that I would rush off and do it right now. But those questions simply lie outside the the purview of science. It dosnt say theyre not important, but it does say that science cannot address it.Its a reflection of the limitations of science...

Containing God within science,s ID attempts, would shrink and limit Him, reducing an almighty force into a "tinkerer" who has to step in to designing a bacterium flagella, rather than create a grand universe that can handle such matters on its own.



-Ken Miller PhD, (lead testimony for plaintiffs of Dover case)

As I said, you should go back nd try to read and understand the basis and outcomes of the Dover trial. You are basically uninformed about several key issues
A. The facts that led up to the case

B. The structure of the plaintiffs case not as a denial of religion but the misapplication of it in science class

C. The total incompetence of the Defense witnesses, (Mike Behe tried to state that "Supernatural investigations" are science)

D a very patient and carefully analytical judge

Did you ever read Edward Humes MONKEY GIRL, it a good read and a good invstigative report about the entire Dover issue. (I recognize how your assertions appear to be some of the "subsequent cover up" by the Discovery Institute to ameliorate their own participation in what really became a fiasco for ID. (DI is ,in the last 10 years speaking out with some of the very same arguments youve been rehashing herein)



farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 May, 2018 07:03 am
@brianjakub,
Quote:
His(judge Jones) religious or philosophical beliefs should be irrelevant.
It was. I just brought it up because youve been slipping into a "Us v Them" argument about everyone who doesnt believe as you is an atheist. I wanted you to know that your much hated Judge Jones was not.

Quote:
They (Ctholic SChools)teach it as a theory like everyone else but they also talk about the statitistical improbabilities that it happened by random introduction of information
I rally have trouble believing you here. IF they teach it as a scientific "Theory", the evidence all supports (that includes the math) and NOTHING refutes. I know our catholic chool science faculties and theres nit any distinction between them and Public schools (with the exception that most catholic HS's have the better students because the diocese isnt strapped to keep students who wont learn.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 May, 2018 07:21 am
@brianjakub,
Quote:
No it doesn't. You can't win the lottery without intelligence designing the lottery.
Im sorry, just take a lottery as a given for a natural occurence. Lets not try to go for mere debating points based on a "Capt Obvious" statement.

Quote:

Natural selection has nothing to do with how the new information is introduced into the system only random processes or complex systems developed by random introduction of new information
Ive never EVER argued the basis of entering new strings of chemicals into DNA and new functions that are genetically driven on somatic cells. You are dead wrong by not recognizing that EVOLUTION BY NATURAL SELECTION IS A TWO PART BIORESPONSE

1. genetic variability is accomplished by sexual congress, mutation, point mutation,polyploidy,integration of symbionts,karyotic fission, replication by several means, and genetic drift (etc). Ive added "information additions at the chromosomal level because many of you seem to think that new info is only added in the genomic level.
Think about how the chimpanzees chromosome 1 and 2 have been fused and have been acquired by the genus Homo (sp)

2 Natural selection then weeds out and picks out the fittest for that environment. ( I submit thats the major reason that we have many fossil "losers " in the fossil record). Ive always been a fan of the "Two part scheme" of evolution. The organism provides genetic bauplans, and the environment selects the phenotype that wins and reproduces further.

You seem to deny that evolution is this two part activity (Is it because you wish to downplay the environments role in evolution)?

farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 May, 2018 07:25 am
Quote:
Teachers don't decide curriculum.
You mean that your ed boards and school boards dont have teachers as appointed or voted- in members. Teachers cannot run for the legislature or school board in your state??? I spent several years on Pa ed board and was later a school board member while I was a teacher

Just because someone is a teacher doesnt mean that they have to renounce their citizenship. I think BJ, that much of what you say comes out of an alternative orifice
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 May, 2018 07:34 am
@farmerman,
see ya all tomorrow, we have a planned visit to the Wilmington Del art museum to take in the Wyeth v Ruskin exhibit
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 May, 2018 08:07 am
We're still waiting for that evidence, BJ.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 May, 2018 11:13 am
@farmerman,
We visited the Wyeth Museum when we saw you in Philly. https://whyy.org/articles/brandywine-art-museum-opens-largest-wyeth-exhibit-to-date/
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 May, 2018 04:30 am
@cicerone imposter,
This show wasnt at the Brandywine, but the Delaware Art Museum in Wilmington. They also have a large Wyeth Collection and th "Brandywine Illustrators" . This show compared the works of John Ruskin to Andrew Wyeth. It was quite interesting how these two guys, separated by almost 100 years ,were interested in similar subjects and for developing their work. .

quite good and worth the trip down state.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 03/06/2021 at 08:23:34