Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

I was simply hoping to get an explanation from the experts on how studying the picture can contribute to health, wealth or happiness so I could participate in the benefits.

The figure on the right seems to me to represent a set of principles which are so far removed from the other figures that I am unable to see the connection. Perhaps I ought to become more eclectic in my tastes.

A concerted effort to acheive and understand coherence would go a long way to solving your communication problems.

No,no Setanta. I was looking for some advice not another meaningless blurt.

How do you see the lady on the right in connection with the figure second right. Surely,having approved the cartoon, you can explain a simple thing like that.

I do not, of course, know if that woman is a lady--however, one assumes as much unless and until one has evidence to the contrary. The relation, which would be obvious to a child, but apparently escapes you entirely, is that they are descended from a common ancestor, which is not--germane to the thread of the conversation--a monkey.

By the way, i don't "blurt" out my posts--i take care to frame very carefully the sneers i fling at your drivel.

In that case I suggest you learn how to do proper sneers and try to rise above the sort of thing which one can hear every day in the lowest common bars and school playgrounds and which is extremely boring and completely pointless.(Tautology used for emphasis.)

What is she descended from in your humble opinion and why is she depicted wearing clothes. Is it colder on the right or has she something to hide which the others don't? And why is she white and accoutred in Marks and Spencer style rather than in any of the other innumerable fashions I have seen on my travels and in photographs?

Don't you yet know that it is a mark of esteem in intellectual circles to be sneered at in your habitual manner? Having your approval would be quite sufficient to cause me to sign up for an evening class in knitting.

spendi wrote:
"...the sort of thing which one can hear every day in the lowest common bars ..."

Looks like spendi knows of what he speaks. No evidence to the contrary. LOL

An evening class in knitting would make far more sense than the posting of meaningless tripe which seems of late to have become your hobby.

Comparing spendis offerings to tripe does a disservice to all lovers of organ meats.

I'm amazed that no American is prepared to step forth and inform you gentlemen that your assertions and blurtings represent a very discreditable face of American education. The absence of such a voice leaves those of us who watch from afar with the impression that it is the only face which can't possibly be true.

I used the word "baloney" earlier today to describe a post relating to the merits of buying or renting a property on the Original Writing thread. It is aidan's thread and she is an American lady who lives in England.

If you would care to check it out you will find that I went on to justify my usage without the slightest fear of contradiction.

Is there any chance of any of you guys attempting to do the same. Booing is a very low class activity.

fm wrote-



Would you explain what this means in words a 12 year old can understand and be enlightened.

Setanta wrote-



Give me an idea why and if it is persuasive I will take notice.

Where's the beef?

Any fool can spew these emotional effusions forth. According to the principles of Resistance Analysis they suggest that you are getting rattled. Losing your cool. Having a twembler on the bottom lip. Making you look like anti-intellectuals. Twaddle merchants. Silly season rhapsody and it's only May. Uncontrollable,indignant rantings of the most unoriginal nature I have ever seen gathered together in one place and incomprehensible and irresponsible from people who seek to offer policy initiatives in the vast American educational system.

Science is being thouroughly discredited by being associated with it. No wonder scientists have never been allowed to get their hands on the levers of power if the mush being displayed is typical of the sort of scientific enquiry which we are supposed to be conducting.

You have actually become a bullying gang which is okay be me as it sets the anti-ID position up for ridicule.

Take notice? I wonder at that fact you apparently can sit up, take notice of relatives and freinds, and handle liquid nourishment on your own.

When you reach that age , I will, guaranteed.

No one who relies upon or makes a living from science is going to do anything but laugh at your assertion to the effect that: "Science is being thouroughly discredited by being associating with it [i.e., the American educational system]." The only thing discredited by the antics of all the idiots with agendas, overt and hidden, how prey upon that portion of the body politic which can be described as the American educational system--is the American educational system itself. Science is alive, and doing quite well.

The only bollocks being peddled around here is your twaddle, when you demonstrate that you know nothing about science, nothing about a theory of evolution, nothing about the poliitics of religion and the religion of politics in the United States (or anywhere else, for that matter), and nothing about the educational system here (or anywhere else for that matter).

You've only ever demonstrated that you are marginally glib, and can shoot off on an tangent using a few words which someone else has posted, and which is completely devoid of real meaning, and hasn't the least relevance to the topic of "intelligent design," and whether it constitutes science or religion. I've known Aidan for years, and we've enjoyed one another's posts here, without reference to your splenetic idiocy. Your witless contention about the Mininster of Education in Québec and scandal, a completely foundless assertion on your part, injected into the conversation which Wandel and i have been having on the topic of ID in Canada, is a perfect example of the extent to which you fill the place of the annoying little sh!t in the schoolyard whom nobody will play with, and who therefore sticks his nose in constantly where it isn't wanted and in conversations about the topic of which he is clueless.

Would this be idiocy that originates in the spleen? How can we distinguish this from other of splendis flights of idiocy?

By the application of the second of the following definitions:

sple·net·ic (splĭ-nĕt'ĭk) also sple·net·i·cal (-ĭ-kəl)
adj.

1. Of or relating to the spleen.
2. Affected or marked by ill humor or irritability

At last, a report from the CBC of the remarks of M. le Ministère de l'Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport (Minister of Education, Leisure and Sports--interesting concepts they have in their ministries):

Quebec probes evolution battle at northern school

Last Updated Thu, 25 May 2006 11:06:28 EDT

CBC News

Setanta,

Apparently that particular school district feels that they can omit evolution from lessons and still meet the guidelines of the Quebec Ministry of Education. Can they get away with that?

Boy oh boy-we are getting our frillies in a twist.

Let's go back to the cartoon then.

What was it supposed to mean?

What did it mean that we are not descended from monkeys or another similar word.

TH Huxley in a 1858 lecture to the Royal Institution; The Special Peculiarities of Man, compared the baboon, gorilla and man, and emphasised their complete continuity. (Page 465 in DARWIN by Desmond and Moore).

"Nay more I believe that the mental and moral faculties are essentially and fundamentally the same in kind in animals and ourselves."

"I can," he continued, "draw no line of demarcation between an instinctive and a reasonable action."

"To the very root and foundation of his nature man is one with the rest of the organic world."

That's Darwin's principle ally.

BTW-The lack of demarcation between an instinctive and a reasonable action which Huxley pointed to foreshadows the modern materialist theory of mind in Ryle, Wittgenstein and latterly Armstrong.

Anyone who doubts this theory has only to study Setanta's most recent,long winded blurtings.

So- back to the cartoon and us not being descended from monkeys and bearing in mind that I didn't post either.

spendi,

Please try to stick to the specific issues being discussed. The cartoon was used to illustrate a point that would be understood by people with even a limited knowledge of science. I agree with the other posters that you are showing an embarrassing lack of understanding.

That is M. Jean-Marc Fournier to determine, apparently. I take it you read the statement from the spokeswoman of the school district. Neither the print nor the broadcast report of the CBC describes the criteria of the Ministry. I'll go see if i can find something, though.

I've just spent quite a while reading the requirements for teachers in the province, but no specific mention is made of a theory of evolution. Maybe i can find something else later--i did actually go to the Minister's web site.