Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Wolf wrote-



Hang on Wolf.I only made it up because essdeeoids made up a word for IDers.Am I not allowed to answer back in kind now.Do you really wish essdeeoids to have a monopoly on making up words.Bit Big Brotherish that I think.

ID-iots was the word.Read all about it back there.

Anyway the quote I gave from my reading around is quite easy to follow if you want to take the trouble.There are no difficult concepts in it.Just unfamiliar words which can be looked up.

ros-you should be a psychiatrist.I heard it's well paid.With insights like yours you'll be rich in no time.

timber-intellect is egoless.So ascendency is logically impossible.They can't be present at the same time.

Offer anything you wish, invent as you will. Anyone's contributions here are regarded as they merit.


Yes, quite. Thats precisely the point I was making. Your acknowledgement, agreement, and excersize are noted.

So where is my ego then?

Essdeeoids seem to have arrived at the point where they automatically see probing questions about their position to be attacks on them which is,of course,not the case at all.It is as if a detached observer is expected to let their case go on the nod which is a bit Big Brotherish too.

No doubt ros can offer a psychological interpretation of that.

ros wrote-



Is that not a good thing? Big Brother doesn't like groups so he would say no.

c.i. wrote-



Am I the only one who drinks around here?

3 pints a night of 3.2% is hardly drinking.It's about the equivalent to two puffs on an Acapulco Gold roll-up. Or one on a Savannah Ganga pipe.

I put the quote about the megaremains on so it might be contrasted with lovely poetry about some long dead prophet going into the daughters of Isreal so you might ponder the relative effects of both on classes of students.I don't really see where I come into it. Maybe I was remiss in forgetting that Big Brother does only Newspeak.

Interesting debate about the Kurnool Group you bring up there spendi. Its about 500 m thick of varying genesis rocktypes , from metamorphic rocks on the bottom through topside shales and limestones. The Chuarids are index fossils that help workers "correlate" (make geographic sense of) other areas near India and mainland Asia, remembering that India(the island) slammed into the belly of Asia between 30 to 50 million years ago. However, the Chuarids (little hunks of algeas or stomids) are similar in structure to the Paralengfengshania macro algaes of the Changlongshan Formation in China. So, the forensic interpretation is that the basin that existed in pre Pangean terrain called Rhodinia, aged at about 1.1 Billion years ago.
This is part of "pool table earth" theory that has been chemically dated by zircons of equivalent ages. This helps us economic types'Sew the continents" back up to before drift ages and allows us to go prospe cting , secure in the information that stuff across the lines can be correlated to other mineral deposits.
Mining tech has gotten so dependent upon continental drift being secure, that we make new finds every day.
Thats how that newer diamond find in Nuniavut happened. A couple of academic types finished some mapping in N Canada that was started by a conglomerate of DeBeers and other diamond interests. De Beers screwed up in their geo history and the rest is now Canadian prospecting History and a couple of new Billionaires. Iss anybody giving a **** except me?

I doubt that spendi drinks near beer.

spendi, on the off chance a probing question or a bit of pertinent commentary might originate from your quarter, I follow your offerings dilligently. A lifetime of sales and leading-edge tech experience has inured me to disappointment ... takes an awful lot to put me off; I'm very patient.

I've amassed a significant experience base centered on intoxicants as well ... its said that if you can remember the '60s, you weren't there. I can only assume I musta been there. Pretty much just beer and whiskey (yeah, whiskey with an "E" ... there's a difference) any more ... but plenty of practice keeps me on that game

yeh but the English dont drink 3.2 do they? Wahts they call that in te service?

you thinking of "small beer" farmer?

Ordinary bitter beer in an English pub is 3.1 - 3.6% alcohol by volume. Larger (blond) beer 4.5 - 5%.

Beers used to be quite a bit stronger. But during the first world war, the govt. regulated to dilute the beer as well as imposing "opening times" on pubs.

Going back a long way, beer was seen as a healthy drink. Certainly it was better than contaminated water supplies. Weak beer drunk for breakfast was called "small beer"...thats all I know about beer, never touch the stuff myself

Piss is the answer fm.

I can't really tolerate alcohol too well.My old man couldn't either.My stomach rejects it if I go at it too much and I get terrible hangovers.So half a dozen aversion therapy sessions in my early days cured me of over indulging. I get pretty silly too.Some of the women I've tackled when well bladdered you wouldn't believe.I assume you will know what I mean.

Basically I just have to get out of the house every night and meet a few people I haven't chosen.I find if you spend all your time with people you have chosen you tend to narrow down your viewpoints.And one keeps in touch with the local social scene such as it is.I also like the faint possibility of meeting someone interesting in a new way.It is rare these days but not so long ago it was common.It's also a good excuse to have a hot soak and get the duds on.
Another thing I find is that it is possible to discern changes in society by observing how pubs evolve.
The evidence seems to me to point to a long term project by the authorities to eradicate pubs entirely.
The smoking ban being a part of the process.I think that before too long we will all have to drink at home in the interests of marshalling us all in front of the TV screen.A BB policy obviously.I see pubs as the last bastion of freedom.

Only two years ago the barmaids were allowed to dress as they thought fit which was often quite interesting but now they all look like the hotel staff in Alphaville.I expect them to have a number tattooed on their necks soon.My local is one of about a 1000 owned by one brewery and I gather all their bar staff are identically dressed in black and well buttoned up.Things may be about to change though.

We have an odd system.There are "Free Houses" where the owner does what he wants.There are "Tenant Landlords" who can more or less do what they want but have to stock brewery approved stuff and there are "Managed Houses" where the boss man is a salaried employee of the brewery and has to follow all their policies.My pub is in the latter category.The brewery is now embarked on a policy of returning 1/3 of their 1000 pubs to tenant landlords and ours is on the list.We have our fingers crossed.Free Houses are quite rare.

I presume customer resistance is the cause.
Maybe evolution is better than Intelligent Design when it comes to pubs although it may be that the designer of evolution fixed it that way and the balls-ups only began when man thought he could improve on things-lese majeste eh?

Actually,I find A2K quite like a pub in it's social dynamics.

well , now I found that quite interesting. I never figured that the breweries owned the pubs. We have bars that accomplish the same, except the patrons dont waste time with coversation other than to say "Waht are you looking at?" Our bars are for getting drunk and disorderly.
I was amazed that your beers are so . well, weak bodied. I thought that there would be some real knockouts with alcohols in the 7 to 9% or more.
I dont know the comparison re: evolution, but Im more inclined to see a pattern of non-random selection process on pubs based upon some corporate strategy in returning profit.

Making beer and then selling it seems to me the unholy alliance of an art and realestate commerce.
Of course I shouldnt talk, we have among the worlds most horrible beers (as I recall) . Beers such as Budweiser and Budweiser light, Miller and a few others , are about as tasteful as creek water. But, given 4 or more, they will develop quite a headache.
When I drank, it was martinis or wine. (Never together)
The wine industry today is like marijuana. All over the world, where wines used to be a high of maybe 14% for burgundies, with 11% not unusual for "tourist varietals". Today wines are always over 15% , even the Canadian wines, which used to be like soda, now pack a solid hit to the liver.

We went to an art gallery opening on Fri and my wife and I actually chose to leave early because, being the only sober ones there, nobody made any sense. I wished I could have had a video of all the women that grabbed me for bawdy hugs. One guy started to "paw" my wife and I asked him to watch himself Or I would pour my glass of tonic down his substantial pants front.

I suppose we ought to punch in and get to arguing

That's going to be difficult fm when you all insist on the "it is","no it isn't",oh yes it is" "ooooh noo it isn't" style of discussion.

It is a thread in Foreign Office memoirs that your senior people engage in that sort of thing.That an assertion is true merely because it has been asserted.Mr Dulles is often mentioned.

I'm not saying this is true but I have the feeling that is one of the causes of the Vietnam adventure and the explanation of our distancing ourselves from it. I don't know but it gets mentioned more than one would expect.It is more common here too these days particularly by what are known as the Blair Babes.

There is a fine legal point that may arise,I hope so,over the smoking ban in public places which the Nannies might not have thought of.Pub=Public House.I think legally that a proper pub,as opposed to a managed one,is technically classed as the landlord's house.Which is not strictly speaking a public place.This just might be the reason that our brewery is returning 300 odd of its pubs to tenant landlords. The smoking ban is not going to apply to the Parliament buildings it seems because technically they consitute a "palace" and thus not a public place.A tenant landlord is thought of legally as inviting patrons into his/her house.Whether such a fine point of law will result in a test case I don't know.It is my goodself who has thought of this potential loophole possibly in desperation. A tenant landlord can refuse entry to his premises at his own discretion.It is the sort of thing that a Blair Babe Nannygoat would never think of while ever she has a hole in her collander. These types think everything is simple and that how they understand things is the only possible way of understanding them. The foxhunting ban is a case in point.The nannies in that case thought that it is straightforward to prove that the hounds were chasing a fox in a court with Mick Mansfield QC defending them or that police cars could be used to get evidence on 2 or 3 thousand acres of private land full of hedges and rain sodden fields and the Chief Constable being friendly with the country set and a bit busy anyway with terrorists and traffic.The Babes did get a chance to draw attention to themselves though which is seemingly irresistable to them.Mr Blair probably only keep them on because he can count on their votes in heated cabinet discussions.Dover had shades of that sort of thing I felt.

In the pub sport is probably the most common topic.There's a traditional connection between sport and boozing and sexual scandals and media.Whole evenings can be enjoyably spent arguing about team selection and other complex factors.Most pub regulars are knowledgeable in such matters.The Dover case has been discussed quite a bit due to my introducing it.The other common topic is women of course.Marital difficulties.

A fairly recent trend is young women getting totally plastered on Fridays and Saturdays and I witnessed one recently who gave her boyfriend a cut eye with a roundarm punch and late on they often take to rather lewd dancing.I put it down to the decline of religion but it is rather good fun at this early stage.

It's a bit old fashioned you know fm is getting possessive about a wife.The secular feminists see it as a claim to property rights and from a strictly scientific viewpoint it is hard to dispute it.

I only get "possesive" when she's uncomfortable. In this case she told the guy that he was being forward.
I often find its easier to ask forgiveness than to seek acceptance.

Im glad you are still trying to sort out what happened at Dover. However the IDers have moved on to more fertile fields in which to sow their seeds of doubt.

Youve somehow agreed with Pdogs friend who teaches Creationism as an entry into the entire topic of evolution (Historical context and basis for present day conytroversies). The interesting thing is that no law actually forbade that approach, even Pa's 2001 biology K-12 standards ( in which I was involved in the hearing process). Most teachers did teach a section re: the evolution of evolution thought beginning with , say, Ibn Sinna and the "vis plastica " theories. The historical context was quite complete and quite acceptable to the state Ed Board.

The IDers couldnt leave it alone, they wanted to supplant the approach that stood on the principles of evidence and testability ,(the good old scientific method) They wanted their "wedge document" to stand coequal with evidenced science.
They just picked the wrong state to do it. Pa has had a history of progressive education policies that include all kinds of accomodations to special beliefs and sectaran views. We were the state that tested the claims of the Anabaptists to teach through their own systems and not be required to salute the flag, or teach units of this or that social dogma or "new math' (most all of which have since been tossed on other dust heaps).
Our combined views from Quaker and other religious
heritages have made for some of the original parochial schools. Dover was poor planning, indecisive leadership, and bad tradition masquerading as science, the entire issue.

If you cannot see the obvious stelth attempt that the Discovery Institute tried to employ, then youve missed much of the point.
I dont expect that you do understand fully, but you draw incorrect parallels to your own social fights.
Youve scoffed at our methods of testing each new inconenience in court, yet you placidly seem accept "creeping socialism' in a nolens volens fashion. You bitch but are compliant. So I think that youre in no greater topo position to comment unless youve engaged in your own "throw the bums out" campaign.

Were busy looking at how the IDers are going to morph their dogma into one even less religious so that they can find some playing field onto which their crap will stick without having some court test knock it out of contention.

There thats more like it, were back to form and disagreeing nicely on this fine mondy morning (for me)

farmerman,

There is a new "wiki" website devoted to providing an intelligent design research database:


Have you heard anything about ResearchID.org?

Im gonna soon learn. This is a complete turn around. I think Johnson is losing hold of DI. Thanks wandel, some fun on the bayou.

wande wrote-



I know some websites devoted to exploring unrestrained evolution research.

fm-thanks for the info.

Let's try taking one thing at once.

Do you think it feasible to eliminate all traces of ID,and I use that loosely,in biology lessons and not eliminate it in the rest of the school?

Man, that's weak beer.






And that's all I have to say about that.

That's not even beer; it pissing in the wind.

Or its a mass-produced American pilsner...

" American pilsner" is like "Virgin naugahyde". A meaningless term. Spendi, the IDers Phucked themselves. They could have had an open field camp in how ID would be introduced in biology or earth sciences. Instead , they wanted the enchilada grande.
Starre decisis is a bitch in a system like ours, youd better win or win in appeal, otherwise it takes lots of manipulation to bring it up again.

Have a shot at it eh?