Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Don't you think that science possesses enough merit to stand on its own.

Your reaction is so typical of science denying trolls.

I think that is eminently fair. Isn't that what science itself does?

And I also think it eminently fair to have "the state legislatures hone their arguments to pass laws that require teachers in public and state funded charters to "fully develop the shortcomings of the theory that is RELIGION".

Enjoy your opinion about religion and science as it pertains to challenging their theories. It's obvious which one wins.

You make no sense whatsoever, CI. Care to explain yourself?

That was weak, even for you. Now I think you're just in it for the A2K thumbs up competition

You can't figure it out? God = imagined, invisible, nobody has seen "this" superman. Men have created many god's, probably in the thousands, depending on the many religions.
Bible: planet earth is 7,000 years old.
Science: planet earth is over 4.5 billion years old.
I trust science over a 2,000 year old book that has many other errors, omissions and contradictions.

Me too, I think that needs a lot more investigation. But the religion folks just start quoting dogma rather than reason when I try to discuss it.
But at least they throw fewer personal insults at me than the anti-ID guys here

What I can't figure out is why you are ranting about this to me. You have obviously seriously misread my post that engendered this.

It is you that can't figure it out, CI. Read again what I wrote.

The ranting just happened to follow your post, because I have layman on ignore. Sorry about that!

Your post directly followed mine and you quoted me. The line is clear.

If you wish to tell me/us that you simply misread/misunderstood my post that is one thing but there is no layman anywhere on the page.

Just curious. Why is that? Layman has been about as offensive as a YouTube kitten video lately. Are you that easily offended by a dissenting opinion?

These children play the "ignore" game all the time. farmerman is great at threatening it, but he never seems to follow thru.

It's incredibly childish, but this site supports this childish behavior in complete contradiction of supposed American values - free, honest and open discussion.

It's virtually impossible to have any kind of rational, intelligent discussion about anything with the ideological zealots (of whom there are many) in this forum, eh, Leddy? CI and Farmer are prime examples. They really don't seem to actually understand much about the issues they are so adamant and fervent about, and they don't want to know.

They simply try to disseminate feeble propagandistic polemicism .Setanta is another of this ilk. I don't even try anymore. I find it hard to have anything but contempt for their lame-ass methods, and it shows. They all hate me for that, of course.

What I have posted on the "is ID science" question here was not intended for them. But they seem to be the only ones who respond--not because they have any interest in discussing the topic, per se. They just want to repeat their ideological mantras ad infinitum. It's infantile, really.

You are right, layman, in what you say about the named folk, but you are also the pot calling the kettle black.

Poor Baby, Sorry I missed your glass of whine. Having " collegial dislike" for some opponent is reserved for someone with anything of value . You dont rise to that bar. Your a whiner and boorish name caller to folks who arent impressed by your attempts at "not so covert" IDiocy.
If you cant respond on an item with your own ideas that arent merely cherry picked from hobby blogs, just practice a little STFU and people will only think youre a fool.

As far as my work in the sciences supporting the facts in evolution Im approaching my 41st year and spend about 25% of my pro bono time listening to uninformed pompous assholes like you who make believe that a clipped line or two confers some kind of practical experience. I get amusement from listening though.

I've never really understood why fanatics, such as the KKK, for example, think that, if they only shout their vociferous, deranged condemnations of blacks, jews, etc. loud enough, and often enough, others will "persuaded" to adopt their wack-ass beliefs.

But when you think about it, such tactics can be (marginally) effective. It can, and does, attract some adherents who are just as irrational as they are. The "sound and fury" of it all is appealing to other idiots.

It has worked perfectly on you as regards Muslims, layman.

You can't even grasp your own inner contradictions. You here above describe, in stark reality, LAYMAN!

You also reveal yourself by your screaming 180 degree tangent away from what farmerman described about you.

And the funny thing, as I said before, farmerman, Setanta and the others you have mentioned have you in them.

Please dont act like an uninformed Dipshit, that's already being done in most schools (even the parochial High Schools have a deeper science curriculum tht imparts information more detailed than youve been able to sustain). Kids today know more about evo/devo than youve been able to cobble up from a new interest imposed by your acceptance " of a personal deity". Your argument are merely impugning honest scientists without any counter evidence or facts. Youve readily admitted of your ignorance of the court cases surounding evolution v Creation/ ID and which is real science. You seem to think that the decision of the Dover case was decided "going in". Consequently youve missed the entire point of how this game works. The judge reached a decision AFTER all the evidence was presented by both sides. The fact that the IDers HAD NO ARGUMENTS and were merely presenting unconnected "beliefs" was not wasted on the judge who said (in the opening statements of his decision) that hed never heard a bigger collection of mindless "Inanity" than what he heard from the Dover(ID) experts. The case was an opportunity to bring in their best minds and wow the court. It Never happened. The case reverberated around the country for the last 16 years and the ID proponents have still to find some entirely new way to subvert the Bill of Rights.

It turns out that the point of the proposed states' legislation into an inquiry to the weaknesses of Darwin has never been to conduct a "scientific inquiry into strengths and weaknesses", Its only being done to make a back door entry for religion in the science class.


1The very first argument for "Inquiry into the weaknesses of Darwin" (and I know of what I speak cause Iv reviewed several state ed compacts that were prepared by Guess who?yep the Discovery Boys).
is In the compact that would have been introduced in Indiana, in which the supportive arguments in the legislative preambles would have spun around the old familiar chestnut of,
"life is too complex to have arisen by evolution"

Now theres a great big bunch of science in that one dont you agree??
YOU DO??? why am I not surprised.

The arguments that wish to inspect any " shortcomings" in evolution theory are entierly technical , not politically driven BULLSHIT. So, like many other things where one party or another is in control of a states legislature, such politically driven dogma will rise like scum on the quiet pond that is science education. Fortunately, in Texas, just this spring, such legislation died in committee and a colleague at a great Texas university informed me that it wasnt for a huge infestation of common sense, it was that the legislature wasnt ready to take on what would be an expensive court case (with Dover as precedent) in a time that has fiscal austerity ruling tghe legilative agenda.

Sometims ya take what ya can get. I never really had any faith in the collective IQ of the Texas legislature, but they knew that itd cost them dearly to fight the "Fight agin Gawdless EVo Lew shion" and maybe have some damn "turncoat GOP judge like Jones in Pa show up on the bench and piss awy another opportunity to bring god back to school science"
You dont really think the whole kerfuffle about "Charter SChools" is about Freedom of educational choice do you??. What many of the states have done to correct any curricular loopholes is to require Charter schools to teach the state defined curricula in order to qualify for half their budgets that the Charter schools get from the states.